[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAP045ApB_9h5Pp=a0L+taA6qFURrR6Se+W77Vb7A_VOWJNKfng@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 09:14:13 -0700
From: Kyle Huey <me@...ehuey.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Robert O'Callahan" <rocallahan@...il.com>,
Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@...cle.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION] x86/debug: After PTRACE_SINGLESTEP DR_STEP is no
longer reported in dr6
On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 9:05 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 04:55:21PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 07:33:08AM -0700, Kyle Huey wrote:
> > > After resuming a ptracee with PTRACE_SINGLESTEP, in the following
> > > ptrace stop retrieving the dr6 value for the tracee gets a value that
> > > does not include DR_STEP (it is in fact always DR6_RESERVED). I
> > > bisected this to the 13cb73490f475f8e7669f9288be0bcfa85399b1f merge. I
> > > did not bisect further.
> > >
> > > I don't see any handling to ever set DR_STEP in virtual_dr6, so I
> > > think this code is just broken.
> > >
> > > Sorry for not testing this when I was CCd on the original patch series :)
> >
> > Urgh, now I have to try and remember how all that worked again ...
> >
> > I suspect it's either one (or both) of the last two:
> >
> > f4956cf83ed1 ("x86/debug: Support negative polarity DR6 bits")
> > d53d9bc0cf78 ("x86/debug: Change thread.debugreg6 to thread.virtual_dr6")
> >
> >
> > Just to clarify, the sequence is something like:
> >
> > - tracer: ptrace(PTRACE_SINGLESTEP)
> > - tracee: #DB, DR6 contains DR_STEP
> > - tracer: ptrace_get_debugreg(6)
> >
> > ?
> >
> > You're right that that would be broken, let me try and figure out what
> > the best way would be 'fix' that.
> >
> > Also, can you confirm that pthread_set_debugreg(6) should not do
> > anything useful?
>
>
> Does something like this make sense?
>
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c b/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c
> index 3c70fb34028b..0e7641ac19a8 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c
> @@ -799,6 +799,13 @@ static __always_inline unsigned long debug_read_clear_dr6(void)
> */
> current->thread.virtual_dr6 = 0;
>
> + /*
> + * If PTRACE requested SINGLE(BLOCK)STEP, make sure to reflect that in
> + * the ptrace visible DR6 copy.
> + */
> + if (test_thread_flag(TIF_BLOCKSTEP) || test_thread_flag(TIF_SINGLESTEP))
> + current->thread.virtual_dr6 |= dr6 & DR_STEP;
> +
> /*
> * The SDM says "The processor clears the BTF flag when it
> * generates a debug exception." Clear TIF_BLOCKSTEP to keep
I don't think the `& DR_STEP` should be necessary, that bit should be
set by the hardware, I believe.
Also if a program sets TF on itself in EFLAGS and generates a trap it
should still have DR_STEP set in the ptrace-visible dr6, which this
won't do.
Is there a reason not to always copy dr6 into virtual_dr6 here,
regardless of TIF_SINGLESTEP/etc?
- Kyle
Powered by blists - more mailing lists