linux-kernel - [PATCH 5.5 056/399] kprobes: Fix optimize_kprobe()/unoptimize

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: <20200221072407.800426387@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Fri, 21 Feb 2020 08:36:21 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        "Steven Rostedt (VMware)" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, bristot@...hat.com,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5.5 056/399] kprobes: Fix optimize_kprobe()/unoptimize_kprobe() cancellation logic

From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>

[ Upstream commit e4add247789e4ba5e08ad8256183ce2e211877d4 ]

optimize_kprobe() and unoptimize_kprobe() cancels if a given kprobe
is on the optimizing_list or unoptimizing_list already. However, since
the following commit:

  f66c0447cca1 ("kprobes: Set unoptimized flag after unoptimizing code")

modified the update timing of the KPROBE_FLAG_OPTIMIZED, it doesn't
work as expected anymore.

The optimized_kprobe could be in the following states:

- [optimizing]: Before inserting jump instruction
  op.kp->flags has KPROBE_FLAG_OPTIMIZED and
  op->list is not empty.

- [optimized]: jump inserted
  op.kp->flags has KPROBE_FLAG_OPTIMIZED and
  op->list is empty.

- [unoptimizing]: Before removing jump instruction (including unused
  optprobe)
  op.kp->flags has KPROBE_FLAG_OPTIMIZED and
  op->list is not empty.

- [unoptimized]: jump removed
  op.kp->flags doesn't have KPROBE_FLAG_OPTIMIZED and
  op->list is empty.

Current code mis-expects [unoptimizing] state doesn't have
KPROBE_FLAG_OPTIMIZED, and that can cause incorrect results.

To fix this, introduce optprobe_queued_unopt() to distinguish [optimizing]
and [unoptimizing] states and fixes the logic in optimize_kprobe() and
unoptimize_kprobe().

[ mingo: Cleaned up the changelog and the code a bit. ]

Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: bristot@...hat.com
Fixes: f66c0447cca1 ("kprobes: Set unoptimized flag after unoptimizing code")
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/157840814418.7181.13478003006386303481.stgit@devnote2
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
---
 kernel/kprobes.c | 67 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
 1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c
index 53534aa258a60..fd81882f05210 100644
--- a/kernel/kprobes.c
+++ b/kernel/kprobes.c
@@ -610,6 +610,18 @@ void wait_for_kprobe_optimizer(void)
 	mutex_unlock(&kprobe_mutex);
 }
 
+static bool optprobe_queued_unopt(struct optimized_kprobe *op)
+{
+	struct optimized_kprobe *_op;
+
+	list_for_each_entry(_op, &unoptimizing_list, list) {
+		if (op == _op)
+			return true;
+	}
+
+	return false;
+}
+
 /* Optimize kprobe if p is ready to be optimized */
 static void optimize_kprobe(struct kprobe *p)
 {
@@ -631,17 +643,21 @@ static void optimize_kprobe(struct kprobe *p)
 		return;
 
 	/* Check if it is already optimized. */
-	if (op->kp.flags & KPROBE_FLAG_OPTIMIZED)
+	if (op->kp.flags & KPROBE_FLAG_OPTIMIZED) {
+		if (optprobe_queued_unopt(op)) {
+			/* This is under unoptimizing. Just dequeue the probe */
+			list_del_init(&op->list);
+		}
 		return;
+	}
 	op->kp.flags |= KPROBE_FLAG_OPTIMIZED;
 
-	if (!list_empty(&op->list))
-		/* This is under unoptimizing. Just dequeue the probe */
-		list_del_init(&op->list);
-	else {
-		list_add(&op->list, &optimizing_list);
-		kick_kprobe_optimizer();
-	}
+	/* On unoptimizing/optimizing_list, op must have OPTIMIZED flag */
+	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!list_empty(&op->list)))
+		return;
+
+	list_add(&op->list, &optimizing_list);
+	kick_kprobe_optimizer();
 }
 
 /* Short cut to direct unoptimizing */
@@ -662,31 +678,34 @@ static void unoptimize_kprobe(struct kprobe *p, bool force)
 		return; /* This is not an optprobe nor optimized */
 
 	op = container_of(p, struct optimized_kprobe, kp);
-	if (!kprobe_optimized(p)) {
-		/* Unoptimized or unoptimizing case */
-		if (force && !list_empty(&op->list)) {
-			/*
-			 * Only if this is unoptimizing kprobe and forced,
-			 * forcibly unoptimize it. (No need to unoptimize
-			 * unoptimized kprobe again :)
-			 */
-			list_del_init(&op->list);
-			force_unoptimize_kprobe(op);
-		}
+	if (!kprobe_optimized(p))
 		return;
-	}
 
 	op->kp.flags &= ~KPROBE_FLAG_OPTIMIZED;
 	if (!list_empty(&op->list)) {
-		/* Dequeue from the optimization queue */
-		list_del_init(&op->list);
+		if (optprobe_queued_unopt(op)) {
+			/* Queued in unoptimizing queue */
+			if (force) {
+				/*
+				 * Forcibly unoptimize the kprobe here, and queue it
+				 * in the freeing list for release afterwards.
+				 */
+				force_unoptimize_kprobe(op);
+				list_move(&op->list, &freeing_list);
+			}
+		} else {
+			/* Dequeue from the optimizing queue */
+			list_del_init(&op->list);
+			op->kp.flags &= ~KPROBE_FLAG_OPTIMIZED;
+		}
 		return;
 	}
+
 	/* Optimized kprobe case */
-	if (force)
+	if (force) {
 		/* Forcibly update the code: this is a special case */
 		force_unoptimize_kprobe(op);
-	else {
+	} else {
 		list_add(&op->list, &unoptimizing_list);
 		kick_kprobe_optimizer();
 	}
-- 
2.20.1