[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190117170015.403157bf619907f8467189fe@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 17:00:15 +0900
From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc: Andreas Ziegler <andreas.ziegler@....de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: uprobes: bug in comm/string output?
On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:13:09 +0900
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 11:16:07 +0100
> Andreas Ziegler <andreas.ziegler@....de> wrote:
>
> >
> > I went into this a bit deeper today, and right now it is simply failing
> > to parse the code because there is no FETCH_OP_COMM case in
> > process_fetch_insn() for uprobes so that will return -EILSEQ, leading to
> > a make_data_loc(0, ...) in store_trace_args(). If we just add
> > FETCH_OP_COMM and let val point to current->comm (that's what
> > trace_kprobe.c does), we get an -EFAULT return value from
> > fetch_store_string because strncpy_from_user() checks if the argument is
> > in user space.
>
> Correct. I missed to add OP_COMM support. And uprobe's fetch_store_string
> is only for user space strings.
>
> > So I think we might need a special case for that, something like
> > FETCH_OP_ST_COMM_STRING which is only used for FETCH_OP_COMM and copies
> > current->comm over to the dynamic area. The implementation could be
> > similar to the old fetch_comm_string implementation before your rewrite.
>
> Hmm, instead, I would like to add current->comm checker and only allows
> to copy that. That would be simpler and enough.
>
> Could you test below patch?
>
>
> tracing: uprobes: Re-enable $comm support for uprobe events
>
> From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
>
> Since commit 533059281ee5 ("tracing: probeevent: Introduce new
> argument fetching code") dropped the $comm support from uprobe
> events, this re-enable it.
>
> For $comm support, use strncpy() instead of strncpy_from_user()
> to copy current task's comm. Because it is in the kernel space,
> strncpy_from_user() always fails to copy the comm.
> This also use strlen() instead of strlen_user() to measure the
> length of the comm.
>
> Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
> Reported-by: Andreas Ziegler <andreas.ziegler@....de>
> ---
> kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 13 +++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
> index e335576b9411..97d134e83e0f 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
> @@ -156,7 +156,10 @@ fetch_store_string(unsigned long addr, void *dest, void *base)
> if (unlikely(!maxlen))
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> - ret = strncpy_from_user(dst, src, maxlen);
> + if (addr == (unsigned long)current->comm)
> + ret = strlcpy(dst, current->comm, maxlen);
> + else
> + ret = strncpy_from_user(dst, src, maxlen);
> if (ret >= 0) {
> if (ret == maxlen)
> dst[ret - 1] = '\0';
> @@ -173,7 +176,10 @@ fetch_store_strlen(unsigned long addr)
> int len;
> void __user *vaddr = (void __force __user *) addr;
>
> - len = strnlen_user(vaddr, MAX_STRING_SIZE);
> + if (addr == (unsigned long)current->comm)
> + len = strlen(current->comm);
To balance with the strnlen_user, we must increse the len in this block.
(strlen doesn't count the final '\0', but strnlen_user counts it)
Thank you,
> + else
> + len = strnlen_user(vaddr, MAX_STRING_SIZE);
>
> return (len > MAX_STRING_SIZE) ? 0 : len;
> }
> @@ -213,6 +219,9 @@ process_fetch_insn(struct fetch_insn *code, struct pt_regs *regs, void *dest,
> case FETCH_OP_IMM:
> val = code->immediate;
> break;
> + case FETCH_OP_COMM:
> + val = (unsigned long)current->comm;
> + break;
> case FETCH_OP_FOFFS:
> val = translate_user_vaddr(code->immediate);
> break;
--
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists