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: <8761s71rxw.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com>
Date:	Tue, 05 Nov 2013 11:51:55 +0900
From:	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	Hyeoncheol Lee <cheol.lee@....com>,
	Hemant Kumar <hkshaw@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"zhangwei\(Jovi\)" <jovi.zhangwei@...wei.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET 00/13] tracing/uprobes: Add support for more fetch methods (v6)

On Mon, 4 Nov 2013 19:57:54 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 11/04, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>>
>> On 11/04, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>> >
>> > On 11/04, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>> > >
>> > > But in any case, I strongly believe that it doesn't make any sense to
>> > > rely on tu->inode in get_user_vaddr().
>> >
>> > Hmm. But I forgot about the case when you probe the function in libc
>> > and want to dump the variable in libc...
>> >
>> > So probably I was wrong and this all needs more thinking. Damn.
>> > Perhaps we really need to pass @file/offset, but it is not clear what
>> > we can do with bss/anon-mapping.
>>
>> Or. Not that I really like this, but just for discussion...
>>
>> How about
>>
>> 	static void __user *get_user_vaddr(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long addr)
>> 	{
>> 		return (void __force __user *)addr + instruction_pointer(regs);
>> 	}
>>
>> ?
>>
>> This should solve the problems with relocations/randomization/bss.
>>
>> The obvious disadvantage is that it is not easy to calculate the
>> offset we need to pass as an argument, it depends on the probed
>> function.
>
> forgot to mention... and instruction_pointer() can't work in ret-probe,
> we need to pass the "unsigned long func" arg somehow...

Hmm.. what's the value of tu->offset in this case?  Does it have the
offset of the return address or the start of the function?

Anyway, what we really need is the base address of the text mapping
IMHO.

Thanks,
Namhyung
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ