[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210927090337.GB1131@C02TD0UTHF1T.local>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2021 10:03:51 +0100
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Vito Caputo <vcaputo@...garu.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Stefan Metzmacher <metze@...ba.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Kenta.Tada@...y.com" <Kenta.Tada@...y.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
Michael Weiß <michael.weiss@...ec.fraunhofer.de>,
Anand K Mistry <amistry@...gle.com>,
Alexey Gladkov <legion@...nel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrea Righi <andrea.righi@...onical.com>,
Ohhoon Kwon <ohoono.kwon@...sung.com>,
Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@...gle.com>,
YiFei Zhu <yifeifz2@...inois.edu>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc: Disable /proc/$pid/wchan
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 07:26:22AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 02:54:24PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 06:16:16PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 05:22:30PM -0700, Vito Caputo wrote:
> > > > Instead of unwinding stacks maybe the kernel should be sticking an
> > > > entrypoint address in the current task struct for get_wchan() to
> > > > access, whenever userspace enters the kernel?
> > >
> > > wchan is supposed to show where the kernel is at the instant the
> > > get_wchan() happens. (i.e. recording it at syscall entry would just
> > > always show syscall entry.)
> >
> > It's supposed to show where a blocked task is blocked; the "wait
> > channel".
> >
> > I'd wanted to remove get_wchan since it requires cross-task stack
> > walking, which is generally painful.
>
> Right -- this is the "fragile" part I'm worried about.
>
> > We could instead have the scheduler entrypoints snapshot their caller
> > into a field in task_struct. If there are sufficiently few callers, that
> > could be an inline wrapper that passes a __func__ string. Otherwise, we
> > still need to symbolize.
>
> Hmm. Does PREEMPT break this?
Within the core scheduler functions interrupts should be disabled, and
as long as we only update task_struct there we shouldn't have a race.
> Can we actually use __builtin_return_address(0) in __schedule?
We'd need to do this in a few entry points above __schedule, since the
currently get_wchan walks until !in_sched_functions(). It should be
possible, though we might need to make sure those the nexus points
aren't inlined.
Thanks,
Mark.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists