linux-kernel - [PATCH 05/10] uprobes: Change handle_trampoline() to find the next chain beforehand

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: <20150504124906.GA22502@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 4 May 2015 14:49:06 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
	Anton Arapov <arapov@...il.com>,
	David Long <dave.long@...aro.org>,
	Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
	"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Jan Willeke <willeke@...ibm.com>,
	Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ibm.com>,
	Mark Wielaard <mjw@...hat.com>,
	Pratyush Anand <panand@...hat.com>,
	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 05/10] uprobes: Change handle_trampoline() to find the next
	chain beforehand

No functional changes, preparation.

Add the new helper, find_next_ret_chain(), which finds the first !chained
entry and returns its ->next. Yes, it is suboptimal. We probably want to
turn ->chained into ->start_of_this_chain pointer and avoid another loop.
But this needs the boring changes in dup_utask(), so lets do this later.

Change the main loop in handle_trampoline() to unwind the stack until ri
is equal to the pointer returned by this new helper.

Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
---
 kernel/events/uprobes.c |   27 ++++++++++++++++-----------
 1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/events/uprobes.c b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
index 2d51580..12245ad 100644
--- a/kernel/events/uprobes.c
+++ b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
@@ -1766,11 +1766,22 @@ handle_uretprobe_chain(struct return_instance *ri, struct pt_regs *regs)
 	up_read(&uprobe->register_rwsem);
 }
 
+static struct return_instance *find_next_ret_chain(struct return_instance *ri)
+{
+	bool chained;
+
+	do {
+		chained = ri->chained;
+		ri = ri->next;	/* can't be NULL if chained */
+	} while (chained);
+
+	return ri;
+}
+
 static void handle_trampoline(struct pt_regs *regs)
 {
 	struct uprobe_task *utask;
-	struct return_instance *ri;
-	bool chained;
+	struct return_instance *ri, *next;
 
 	utask = current->utask;
 	if (!utask)
@@ -1780,24 +1791,18 @@ static void handle_trampoline(struct pt_regs *regs)
 	if (!ri)
 		goto sigill;
 
+	next = find_next_ret_chain(ri);
 	/*
 	 * TODO: we should throw out return_instance's invalidated by
 	 * longjmp(), currently we assume that the probed function always
 	 * returns.
 	 */
 	instruction_pointer_set(regs, ri->orig_ret_vaddr);
-
-	for (;;) {
+	do {
 		handle_uretprobe_chain(ri, regs);
-
-		chained = ri->chained;
 		ri = free_ret_instance(ri);
 		utask->depth--;
-
-		if (!chained)
-			break;
-		BUG_ON(!ri);
-	}
+	} while (ri != next);
 
 	utask->return_instances = ri;
 	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/