| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <b70efdcb0712310929y1bf871eah2adb531a7ed89673@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 11:29:35 -0600
From: "Quentin Barnes" <qbarnes@...il.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] [CFT] Code clarification patch to Kprobes arch code
Since people are discussing some x86 Kprobes code cleanup, I thought
I would contribute a small change as well. When developing the
Kprobes arch code for ARM, I ran across some code found in x86 and
s390 Kprobes arch code which I didn't consider as good as it could
be.
Once I figured out what the code was doing, I changed the code
for ARM Kprobes to work the way I felt was more appropriate.
I've tested the code this way in ARM for about a year and would
like to push the same change to the other affected architectures.
The code in question is in kprobe_exceptions_notify() which
does:
====
/* kprobe_running() needs smp_processor_id() */
preempt_disable();
if (kprobe_running() &&
kprobe_fault_handler(args->regs, args->trapnr))
ret = NOTIFY_STOP;
preempt_enable();
====
For the moment, ignore the code having the preempt_disable()/
preempt_enable() pair in it.
The problem is that kprobe_running() needs to call smp_processor_id()
which will assert if preemption is enabled. That sanity check by
smp_processor_id() makes perfect sense since calling it with preemption
enabled would return an unreliable result.
But the function kprobe_exceptions_notify() can be called from a
context where preemption could be enabled. If that happens, the
assertion in smp_processor_id() happens and we're dead. So what
the original author did (speculation on my part!) is put in the
preempt_disable()/preempt_enable() pair to simply defeat the check.
Once I figured out what was going on, I considered this an
inappropriate approach. If kprobe_exceptions_notify() is called
from a preemptible context, we can't be in a kprobe processing
context at that time anyways since kprobes requires preemption to
already be disabled, so just check for preemption enabled, and if
so, blow out before ever calling kprobe_running(). I wrote the ARM
kprobe code like this:
====
/* To be potentially processing a kprobe fault and to
* trust the result from kprobe_running(), we have
* be non-preemptible. */
if (!preemptible() && kprobe_running() &&
kprobe_fault_handler(args->regs, args->trapnr))
ret = NOTIFY_STOP;
====
The above code has been working fine for ARM Kprobes for a year.
So I changed the x86 code (2.6.24-rc6) to be the same way and ran
the Systemtap tests on that kernel. As on ARM, Systemtap on x86
comes up with the same test results either way, so it's a neutral
external functional change (as expected).
This issue has been discussed previously on linux-arm-kernel and the
Systemtap mailing lists. Pointers to the by base for the two
discussions:
http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20071219.223225.1f5c2a5e.en.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/systemtap/2007-q1/msg00251.html
I felt it was time to push it out and also get testing feedback from
the affected architectures (s390/x86_{32|64}).
Thoughts? Comments?
Quentin
Patch for the suggested change to 2.6.24-rc6.
Signed-off-by: Quentin Barnes <qbarnes@...il.com>
diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/kprobes.c b/arch/s390/kernel/kprobes.c
index c5549a2..53b167f 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kernel/kprobes.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kernel/kprobes.c
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
#include <linux/kprobes.h>
#include <linux/ptrace.h>
+#include <linux/hardirq.h>
#include <linux/preempt.h>
#include <linux/stop_machine.h>
#include <linux/kdebug.h>
@@ -595,12 +596,12 @@ int __kprobes kprobe_exceptions_notify(struct
notifier_block *self,
ret = NOTIFY_STOP;
break;
case DIE_TRAP:
- /* kprobe_running() needs smp_processor_id() */
- preempt_disable();
- if (kprobe_running() &&
+ /* To be potentially processing a kprobe fault and to
+ * trust the result from kprobe_running(), we have
+ * be non-preemptible. */
+ if (!preemptible() && kprobe_running() &&
kprobe_fault_handler(args->regs, args->trapnr))
ret = NOTIFY_STOP;
- preempt_enable();
break;
default:
break;
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes_32.c b/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes_32.c
index 3a020f7..007fbdf 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes_32.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes_32.c
@@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
#include <linux/kprobes.h>
#include <linux/ptrace.h>
+#include <linux/hardirq.h>
#include <linux/preempt.h>
#include <linux/kdebug.h>
#include <asm/cacheflush.h>
@@ -668,12 +669,12 @@ int __kprobes kprobe_exceptions_notify(struct
notifier_block *self,
ret = NOTIFY_STOP;
break;
case DIE_GPF:
- /* kprobe_running() needs smp_processor_id() */
- preempt_disable();
- if (kprobe_running() &&
+ /* To be potentially processing a kprobe fault and to
+ * trust the result from kprobe_running(), we have
+ * be non-preemptible. */
+ if (!preemptible() && kprobe_running() &&
kprobe_fault_handler(args->regs, args->trapnr))
ret = NOTIFY_STOP;
- preempt_enable();
break;
default:
break;
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes_64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes_64.c
index 5df19a9..447cbdc 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes_64.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes_64.c
@@ -34,6 +34,7 @@
#include <linux/ptrace.h>
#include <linux/string.h>
#include <linux/slab.h>
+#include <linux/hardirq.h>
#include <linux/preempt.h>
#include <linux/module.h>
#include <linux/kdebug.h>
@@ -654,12 +655,12 @@ int __kprobes kprobe_exceptions_notify(struct
notifier_block *self,
ret = NOTIFY_STOP;
break;
case DIE_GPF:
- /* kprobe_running() needs smp_processor_id() */
- preempt_disable();
- if (kprobe_running() &&
+ /* To be potentially processing a kprobe fault and to
+ * trust the result from kprobe_running(), we have
+ * be non-preemptible. */
+ if (!preemptible() && kprobe_running() &&
kprobe_fault_handler(args->regs, args->trapnr))
ret = NOTIFY_STOP;
- preempt_enable();
break;
default:
break;
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists