linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] Tracing vs CR2

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>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c2f775d7-93e5-1109-25f4-2b077d2c70e1@oracle.com>
Date:   Wed, 17 Jul 2019 09:46:29 +0200
From:   Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...cle.com>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux_lkml_grp@...cle.com, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        He Zhe <zhe.he@...driver.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>, devel@...ukata.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] Tracing vs CR2


On 7/17/19 3:02 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 2:53 PM Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...cle.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 7/16/19 9:33 PM, Vegard Nossum wrote:
>>>
>>> On 7/11/19 1:40 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Here's the latest (and hopefully final) set of tracing vs CR2 patches.
>>>>
>>>> They are basically the same as v2, with only minor edits and tags
>>>> collected
>>>> from the last review.
>>>>
>>>> Please consider.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I ran my own battery of tests on your patch set on top of
>>> 5ad18b2e60b75c7297a998dea702451d33a052ed and ran into this:
>>>
> 
> On a different thread, Peter and I decided that the last patch in this
> series (the one that removes the _DEBUG stuff) is wrong.  Can you see
> if these are reproducible with that patch removed?

Yes, without the last patch I still get this:

Run /init as init process
init[711]: segfault at 40000000 ip 000000004000000a sp 0000000040000ff8 
error 7
------------[ cut here ]------------
General protection fault in user access. Non-canonical address?
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 711 at arch/x86/mm/extable.c:126 
ex_handler_uaccess+0x5d/0x70
CPU: 0 PID: 711 Comm: init Not tainted 5.2.0+ #125
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 
Ubuntu-1.8.2-1ubuntu1 04/01/2014
init[716]: segfault at 40000000 ip 000000004000000a sp 0000000040000ff8 
error 7
RIP: 0010:ex_handler_uaccess+0x5d/0x70
Code: 5d 41 5c c3 e8 c4 8e 0e 00 80 3d e5 74 1e 01 00 75 d3 e8 b6 8e 0e 
00 48 c7 c7 10 a7 fb 81 c6 05 d0 74 1e 01 01 e8 d1 43 01 00 <0f> 0b eb 
b7 0f 1f 44 00 00 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 55 48 89
RSP: 0000:ffffc9000065fa18 EFLAGS: 00010086
RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffffffff81c07dac RCX: ffffffff811a887c
init[714]: segfault at 40000000 ip 000000004000000a sp 0000000040000ff8 
error 7
RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffff8289f05f RDI: 0000000000000093
RBP: ffffc9000065fa88 R08: 000000002e80b265 R09: 000000000000003f
init[718]: segfault at 40000000 ip 000000004000000a sp 0000000040000ff8 
error 7
R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 000000000000000d
R13: 000000000000000d R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000
FS:  00000000006ce880(0000) GS:ffff88803ec00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
CR2: 000000003fffffe0 CR3: 000000003d2f6004 CR4: 00000000003606f0
DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
Call Trace:
Code: Bad RIP value.
  fixup_exception+0x50/0x6a
  do_general_protection+0x40/0x160
  general_protection+0x2d/0x40
RIP: 0010:arch_stack_walk_user+0x71/0x100
Code: 00 48 83 e8 10 49 39 c4 77 45 4c 8b 04 24 4c 89 e3 4d 89 fd 4c 89 
fd 41 83 87 98 0a 00 00 01 0f 01 cb 0f ae e8 31 c0 4c 89 e2 <4c> 8b 33 
4d 89 f4 85 c0 75 7a 48 8b 73 08 0f 01 ca 85 c0 74 1f 65
[...]

This is my reproducer (as init):

#include <fcntl.h>
#include <sched.h>
#include <sys/mman.h>
#include <sys/mount.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <sys/user.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <wait.h>

struct child_data {
   (*code)();
};

child_fn(void *arg)
{
   child_data *data = arg;
   mprotect(data->code, PAGE_SIZE, PROT_EXEC);
   data->code();
}

int main()
{
   mkdir("/sys", 7);
   mount("nodev", "/sys", "sysfs", 0, "");
   mount("nodev", "/sys/kernel/tracing", "tracefs", 0, "");

   int tracing_options_userstacktrace = 
open("/sys/kernel/tracing/options/userstacktrace", O_RDWR);
   write(tracing_options_userstacktrace, "1\n", 2);

   int tracing_events_preemptirq_irq_disable = 
open("/sys/kernel/tracing/events/preemptirq/irq_disable/enable", O_RDWR);
   write(tracing_events_preemptirq_irq_disable, "1\n", 2);

   void *code = mmap(0, PAGE_SIZE, PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE | 
MAP_ANONYMOUS | MAP_32BIT, 1, 0);
   {
     unsigned char *output = code;

     *output++ = 72;
     *output++ = 189;
     for (int i = 0; i < 8; ++i)
       *output++ = i;
   }

   void *child_stack = mmap(0, PAGE_SIZE, PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE | 
MAP_ANONYMOUS | MAP_32BIT, 1, 0);

   while (1) {
     child_data data = { code };
     clone(child_fn, child_stack, SIGCHLD, &data);
   }
}

Compiled with -static and booted with "norandmaps" (for some reason that
makes a difference), this is 100% reproducible for me, although the
reproducer is somewhat sensitive to small changes that I don't quite
understand.


Vegard