[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200812093114.GA13676@yuki.lan>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 11:31:14 +0200
From: Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@...e.cz>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@...cle.com>,
kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, lkp@...ts.01.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, ltp@...ts.linux.it
Subject: Re: [LTP] [x86/entry] 2bbc68f837: ltp.ptrace08.fail
Hi!
> do_debug is a bit of a red herring here. ptrace should not be able to
> put a breakpoint on a kernel address, period. I would just pick a
> fixed address that's in the kernel text range or even just in the
> pre-KASLR text range and make sure it gets rejected. Maybe try a few
> different addresses for good measure.
I've looked at the code and it seems like this would be a bit more
complicated since the breakpoint is set by an accident in a race and the
call still fails. Which is why the test triggers the breakpoint and
causes infinite loop in the kernel...
I guess that we could instead read back the address with
PTRACE_PEEKUSER, so something as:
break_addr = ptrace(PTRACE_PEEKUSER, child_pid,
(void *)offsetof(struct user, u_debugreg[0]),
NULL);
if (break_addr == kernel_addr)
tst_res(TFAIL, "ptrace() set break on a kernel address");
--
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@...e.cz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists