linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -tip v5 07/10] kprobes/x86: Support kprobes jump optimization on x86

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4B0C1141.3070807@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:00:49 -0500
From:	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	systemtap <systemtap@...rces.redhat.com>,
	DLE <dle-develop@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ibm.com>,
	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Anders Kaseorg <andersk@...lice.com>,
	Tim Abbott <tabbott@...lice.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip v5 07/10] kprobes/x86: Support kprobes jump optimization
 on x86

Hi Peter,

H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 11/23/2009 03:22 PM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>>
>> This uses stop_machine() for corss modifying code from int3 to jump.
>> It doesn't allow us to modify code on NMI/SMI path. However, since
>> kprobes itself doesn't support NMI/SMI code probing, it's not a
>> problem.
>>
>
> I'm a bit confused by the above statement... does that mean you're
> poking int3 and *then* do stop_machine()?

Yes, as I said in http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/11/24/310,
there are two separated issues.

----
We have to separate below issues:
  - int3-based multi-bytes code replacement
  - multi-instruction replacement with int3-detour code

The former is implemented on patch 9/10 and 10/10. As you can see,
these patches are RFC status, because I'd like to wait for official
reply of safeness from processor architects.
And it may be able to use a dummy IPI for 2nd IPI because it
just for waiting int3 interrupts. But again, it is just estimated that
replacing with/recovering from int3 is automatically synchronized...

However, at least stop_machine() method is officially described
at "7.1.3 Handling Self- and Cross-Modifying Code" on the intel's
software developer's manual 3A . So currently we can use it.

For the latter issue, as I explained on previous reply, we need
to wait all running interrupts including hardware interrupts.
Thus I used synchronize_sched().
----

So that the previous "x86 generic jump patching" patch is
basically for single-instruction replacement. For multi-instructions
replacement, we need to make detour code and wait for all running
interruption. (of course, there are other static code limitations,
as I described at "Safety check" section in patch 0/10.)

Thank you,

-- 
Masami Hiramatsu

Software Engineer
Hitachi Computer Products (America), Inc.
Software Solutions Division

e-mail: mhiramat@...hat.com

--
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/