[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <76948cf5011e454494107cea61c6930c@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 11:48:44 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Mathieu Desnoyers' <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
CC: William Cohen <wcohen@...hat.com>,
"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"lttng@...iableembeddedsystems.com"
<lttng@...iableembeddedsystems.com>,
lttng-dev <lttng-dev@...ts.lttng.org>
Subject: RE: optimized kprobes illegal instructions in v4.19 stable kernels
From: Mathieu Desnoyers
> Sent: 04 February 2019 19:15
> I notice this commit as a possible culprit of the illegal instructions my lttng
> users are noticing on arm32 when using kprobes on a v4.19.13 Linux kernel
> in a Yocto environment [1]. They were able to reproduce the issue with perf
> as well.
>
> commit e46daee53bb50bde38805f1823a182979724c229
> Author: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> Date: Tue Oct 30 22:12:56 2018 +0100
>
> ARM: 8806/1: kprobes: Fix false positive with FORTIFY_SOURCE
>
> I *think* the intent there was to do
>
> - memcpy(code, &optprobe_template_entry,
> + memcpy(code, (unsigned long *)&optprobe_template_entry,
>
> But if you look at the commit, the "&" seems to have been stripped away,
> which happens to change the behavior significantly.
Which is why you shouldn't add casts to shut up compiler warnings ....
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists