linux-kernel - [PATCH 5/6] uprobes: teach handle_swbp() to rely on "is_swbp" rather than uprobes

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: <20120405222203.GE19166@redhat.com>
Date:	Fri, 6 Apr 2012 00:22:03 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
	Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Anton Arapov <anton@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH 5/6] uprobes: teach handle_swbp() to rely on "is_swbp"
	rather than uprobes_srcu

Currently handle_swbp() assumes that it can't race with unregister,
so it roughly does:

	if (find_uprobe(vaddr))
		process_uprobe();
	else
		send_sig(SIGTRAP);

This relies on the not-really-working uprobes_srcu code we are going
to remove.

With this patch we rely on the result of is_swbp_at_addr_fast(bp_vaddr)
if find_uprobe() fails.

If is_swbp == 1, then we hit the normal int3, we should send SIGTRAP.

If is_swbp == 0, we raced with uprobe_unregister(), we simply restart
this insn again.

The "difficult" case is is_swbp == -EFAULT, when we can't read this
memory. In this case I think we should restart too, and this is more
correct compared to the current code which sends SIGTRAP.

Ignoring ENOMEM/etc from get_user_pages(), this can only happen if
another thread unmaps this memory before find_active_uprobe() takes
mmap_sem. It would be better to pretend it was unmapped before this
insn was executed, restart, and get SIGSEGV.
---
 kernel/events/uprobes.c |   18 +++++++++++++++---
 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/events/uprobes.c b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
index 2af458d..ed76ee5 100644
--- a/kernel/events/uprobes.c
+++ b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
@@ -1538,14 +1538,26 @@ static void handle_swbp(struct pt_regs *regs)
 	struct uprobe_task *utask;
 	struct uprobe *uprobe;
 	unsigned long bp_vaddr;
-	int is_swbp;
+	int uninitialized_var(is_swbp);
 
 	bp_vaddr = uprobe_get_swbp_addr(regs);
 	uprobe = find_active_uprobe(bp_vaddr, &is_swbp);
 
 	if (!uprobe) {
-		/* No matching uprobe; signal SIGTRAP. */
-		send_sig(SIGTRAP, current, 0);
+		if (is_swbp > 0) {
+			/* No matching uprobe; signal SIGTRAP. */
+			send_sig(SIGTRAP, current, 0);
+		} else {
+			/*
+			 * Either we raced with uprobe_unregister() or we can't
+			 * access this memory. The latter is only possible if
+			 * another thread plays with our ->mm. In both cases
+			 * we can simply restart. If this vma was unmapped we
+			 * can pretend this insn was not executed yet and get
+			 * the (correct) SIGSEGV after restart.
+			 */
+			instruction_pointer_set(regs, bp_vaddr);
+		}
 		return;
 	}
 
-- 
1.5.5.1


--
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/