[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171004154413.30daa238@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2017 15:44:13 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc: Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Anil S Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@...hat.com>,
Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] kprobes: improve error handling when
arming/disarming kprobes
Masami,
Can you review these patches?
-- Steve
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 21:14:12 +0200
Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patchset attempts to improve error handling when arming or disarming
> ftrace-based kprobes. The current behavior is to simply WARN when ftrace
> (un-)registration fails, without propagating the error code. This can lead
> to confusing situations where, for example, register_kprobe()/enable_kprobe()
> would return 0 indicating success even if arming via ftrace had failed. In
> this scenario we'd end up with a non-functioning kprobe even though kprobe
> registration (or enablement) returned success. In this patchset, we take
> errors from ftrace into account and propagate the error when we cannot arm
> or disarm a kprobe.
>
> Below is an example that illustrates the problem using livepatch and
> systemtap (which uses kprobes underneath). Both livepatch and kprobes use
> ftrace ops with the IPMODIFY flag set, so registration at the same
> function entry is limited to only one ftrace user.
>
> Before
> ------
> # modprobe livepatch-sample # patches cmdline_proc_show, ftrace ops has IPMODIFY set
> # stap -e 'probe kernel.function("cmdline_proc_show").call { printf ("cmdline_proc_show\n"); }'
>
> .. (nothing prints after reading /proc/cmdline) ..
>
> The systemtap handler doesn't execute due to a kprobe arming failure caused
> by a ftrace IPMODIFY conflict with livepatch, and there isn't an obvious
> indication of error from systemtap (because register_kprobe() returned
> success) unless the user inspects dmesg.
>
> After
> -----
> # modprobe livepatch-sample
> # stap -e 'probe kernel.function("cmdline_proc_show").call { printf ("cmdline_proc_show\n"); }'
> WARNING: probe kernel.function("cmdline_proc_show@...me/jeyu/work/linux-next/fs/proc/cmdline.c:6").call (address 0xffffffffa82fe910) registration error (rc -16)
>
> Although the systemtap handler doesn't execute (as it shouldn't), the
> ftrace error is propagated and now systemtap prints a visible error message
> stating that (kprobe) registration had failed (because register_kprobe()
> returned an error), along with the propagated error code.
>
> This patchset was based on Petr Mladek's original patchset (patches 2 and 3)
> back in 2015, which improved kprobes error handling, found here:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/26/452
>
> However, further work on this had been paused since then and the patches
> were not upstreamed.
>
> This patchset has been lightly sanity-tested (on linux-next) with kprobes,
> kretprobes, jprobes, and optimized kprobes. It passes the kprobes smoke
> test, but more testing is greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jessica
>
> ---
> Jessica Yu (2):
> kprobes: propagate error from arm_kprobe_ftrace()
> kprobes: propagate error from disarm_kprobe_ftrace()
>
> kernel/kprobes.c | 163 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
> 1 file changed, 112 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-)
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists