linux-kernel - [patch added to the 3.12 stable tree] ARC: make sure instruction

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1439216287-26416-5-git-send-email-jslaby@suse.cz>
Date:	Mon, 10 Aug 2015 16:17:45 +0200
From:	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
To:	stable@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Alexey Brodkin <abrodkin@...opsys.com>, arc-linux-dev@...opsys.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Vineet Gupta <vgupta@...opsys.com>,
	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Subject: [patch added to the 3.12 stable tree] ARC: make sure instruction_pointer() returns unsigned value

From: Alexey Brodkin <abrodkin@...opsys.com>

This patch has been added to the 3.12 stable tree. If you have any
objections, please let us know.

===============

commit f51e2f1911122879eefefa4c592dea8bf794b39c upstream.

Currently instruction_pointer() returns pt_regs->ret and so return value
is of type "long", which implicitly stands for "signed long".

While that's perfectly fine when dealing with 32-bit values if return
value of instruction_pointer() gets assigned to 64-bit variable sign
extension may happen.

And at least in one real use-case it happens already.
In perf_prepare_sample() return value of perf_instruction_pointer()
(which is an alias to instruction_pointer() in case of ARC) is assigned
to (struct perf_sample_data)->ip (which type is "u64").

And what we see if instuction pointer points to user-space application
that in case of ARC lays below 0x8000_0000 "ip" gets set properly with
leading 32 zeros. But if instruction pointer points to kernel address
space that starts from 0x8000_0000 then "ip" is set with 32 leadig
"f"-s. I.e. id instruction_pointer() returns 0x8100_0000, "ip" will be
assigned with 0xffff_ffff__8100_0000. Which is obviously wrong.

In particular that issuse broke output of perf, because perf was unable
to associate addresses like 0xffff_ffff__8100_0000 with anything from
/proc/kallsyms.

That's what we used to see:
 ----------->8----------
  6.27%  ls       [unknown]                [k] 0xffffffff8046c5cc
  2.96%  ls       libuClibc-0.9.34-git.so  [.] memcpy
  2.25%  ls       libuClibc-0.9.34-git.so  [.] memset
  1.66%  ls       [unknown]                [k] 0xffffffff80666536
  1.54%  ls       libuClibc-0.9.34-git.so  [.] 0x000224d6
  1.18%  ls       libuClibc-0.9.34-git.so  [.] 0x00022472
 ----------->8----------

With that change perf output looks much better now:
 ----------->8----------
  8.21%  ls       [kernel.kallsyms]        [k] memset
  3.52%  ls       libuClibc-0.9.34-git.so  [.] memcpy
  2.11%  ls       libuClibc-0.9.34-git.so  [.] malloc
  1.88%  ls       libuClibc-0.9.34-git.so  [.] memset
  1.64%  ls       [kernel.kallsyms]        [k] _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore
  1.41%  ls       [kernel.kallsyms]        [k] __d_lookup_rcu
 ----------->8----------

Signed-off-by: Alexey Brodkin <abrodkin@...opsys.com>
Cc: arc-linux-dev@...opsys.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vgupta@...opsys.com>
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
---
 arch/arc/include/asm/ptrace.h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/arc/include/asm/ptrace.h b/arch/arc/include/asm/ptrace.h
index 1bfeec2c0558..2a58af7a2e3a 100644
--- a/arch/arc/include/asm/ptrace.h
+++ b/arch/arc/include/asm/ptrace.h
@@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ struct callee_regs {
 	long r25, r24, r23, r22, r21, r20, r19, r18, r17, r16, r15, r14, r13;
 };

-#define instruction_pointer(regs)	((regs)->ret)
+#define instruction_pointer(regs)	(unsigned long)((regs)->ret)
 #define profile_pc(regs)		instruction_pointer(regs)

 /* return 1 if user mode or 0 if kernel mode */
-- 
2.5.0

--
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/