linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 4/6] uprobes/x86: Emulate rip-relative call's

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: <20140410142820.GA24720@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 10 Apr 2014 16:28:20 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
Cc:	Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
	Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
	Anton Arapov <aarapov@...hat.com>,
	David Long <dave.long@...aro.org>,
	"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>,
	Jonathan Lebon <jlebon@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/6] uprobes/x86: Emulate rip-relative call's

On 04/10, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
> (2014/04/10 22:41), Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > On 04/09/2014 05:43 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >> On 04/08, Jim Keniston wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, 2014-04-06 at 22:16 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >>>> 0xe8. Anything else?
> >>>
> >>> No, I think e8 is the only call instruction uprobes will see.
> >>
> >> Good.
> >
> > There is this monstrosity, "16-bit override for branches" in 64-mode:
> >
> > 66 e8 nn nn       callw   <offset16>
> >
> > Nobody sane uses it because it truncates instruction pointer.
>
> No problem, insn.c can handle that too. :)

Does it?

	"callw 1f; 1:\n"
	"rep; nop\n"

objdump:

	66 e8 00 00             callw  485 <_init-0x3ffed3>
	f3 90                   pause


if we probe this "callw", we copy MAX_INSN_BYTES into auprobe->insn,
and after insn_get_length() (insn_complete() == T)

	// this is correct
	OPCODE1() == e8	

	// this all looks wrong
	insn->length == 6
	insn->immediate.value == -1863122944
	insn->immediate.nbytes == 4

so it seems that lib/insn.c treats the next "pause" insn as the high
16 bits of address.

Oleg.

--
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/