[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56EBFD3E.5070600@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 09:06:06 -0400
From: David Long <dave.long@...aro.org>
To: James Morse <james.morse@....com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Sandeepa Prabhu <sandeepa.s.prabhu@...il.com>,
William Cohen <wcohen@...hat.com>,
Pratyush Anand <panand@...hat.com>,
Steve Capper <steve.capper@...aro.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Dave P Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Robin Murphy <Robin.Murphy@....com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org>,
Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@...aro.org>,
Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org>,
Yang Shi <yang.shi@...aro.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
"Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@...il.com>,
John Blackwood <john.blackwood@...r.com>,
Feng Kan <fkan@....com>,
Balamurugan Shanmugam <bshanmugam@....com>,
Vladimir Murzin <Vladimir.Murzin@....com>,
Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@...roid.com>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 1/9] arm64: Add HAVE_REGS_AND_STACK_ACCESS_API feature
On 03/11/2016 01:07 PM, James Morse wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On 09/03/16 05:32, David Long wrote:
>> From: "David A. Long" <dave.long@...aro.org>
>>
>> Add HAVE_REGS_AND_STACK_ACCESS_API feature for arm64.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: David A. Long <dave.long@...aro.org>
>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c
>> index ff7f132..efebf0f 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c
>
> [ ... SNIP ... ]
>
>> +/**
>> + * regs_within_kernel_stack() - check the address in the stack
>> + * @regs: pt_regs which contains kernel stack pointer.
>> + * @addr: address which is checked.
>> + *
>> + * regs_within_kernel_stack() checks @addr is within the kernel stack page(s).
>> + * If @addr is within the kernel stack, it returns true. If not, returns false.
>> + */
>> +bool regs_within_kernel_stack(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long addr)
>> +{
>> + return ((addr & ~(THREAD_SIZE - 1)) ==
>> + (kernel_stack_pointer(regs) & ~(THREAD_SIZE - 1)));
>
> I'm not sure where this is called from, but if kernel_stack_pointer(regs) could
> ever point into an irq_stack you will get the wrong result.
>
> arch/arm64/include/asm/irq.h has 'on_irq_stack(sp, cpu)' which should help,
> although you will need to check the bounds of the irq_stack separately.
>
>
> The horrible details...
>
> From arch/arm64/kernel/irq.c:20
>> /* irq stack only needs to be 16 byte aligned - not IRQ_STACK_SIZE aligned. */
>> DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long [IRQ_STACK_SIZE/sizeof(long)], irq_stack)
>> __aligned(16);
>
> This was because per-cpu variables can be at-most page aligned.
> 6cdf9c7ca687 ("arm64: Store struct thread_info in sp_el0") changed
> current_thread_info() to work on these weirdly aligned irq_stacks.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> James
>
>
It looks like this is ultimately used (currently) only by the
arch-independent kprobes tracing code. But it does seem like this will
be recording the wrong data when stack contents are being traced from
interrupt routine probes. I will put a fix in for the next spin.
Thanks,
-dl
Powered by blists - more mailing lists