linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 08/18] static_call: Avoid kprobes on inline static

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]

Date:   Wed, 2 Sep 2020 11:48:20 +0200
From:   peterz@...radead.org
To:     Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc:     x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
        bristot@...hat.com, jbaron@...mai.com,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
        mingo@...nel.org, namit@...are.com, hpa@...or.com, luto@...nel.org,
        ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org, jpoimboe@...hat.com,
        pbonzini@...hat.com, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
        linux@...musvillemoes.dk
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 08/18] static_call: Avoid kprobes on inline
 static_call()s

On Wed, Sep 02, 2020 at 10:35:08AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 15:57:43 +0200
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> 
> > Similar to how we disallow kprobes on any other dynamic text
> > (ftrace/jump_label) also disallow kprobes on inline static_call()s.
> 
> Looks good to me. 
> 
> Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
> 
> BTW, here we already have 5 subsystems which reserves texts
> (ftrace, alternatives, jump_label, static_call and kprobes.)
> 
> Except for the kprobes and ftrace, we can generalize the reserved-text
> code because those are section-based static address-areas (or lists).

Doesn't ftrace also have a section where it lists all the mcount
locations?

On top of that ftrace probably registers its trampolines.

Do we support adding kprobes to BPF-JIT'ed code or should we blacklist
them too?