linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tracepoint: Do not fail unregistering a probe due to memory allocation

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: <20201117171904.2d455699@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Tue, 17 Nov 2020 17:19:04 -0500
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Matt Mullins <mmullins@...x.us>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...omium.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracepoint: Do not fail unregistering a probe due to
 memory allocation

On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 13:33:42 -0800
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:

> As I think got discussed in the thread, what you had here wouldn't work
> in a CFI build if the function prototype of the call site and the
> function don't match. (Though I can't tell if .func() is ever called?)
> 
> i.e. .func's prototype must match tp_stub_func()'s.
> 


Hmm, I wonder how you handle tracepoints? This is called here:

include/linux/tracepoint.h:


#define DEFINE_TRACE_FN(_name, _reg, _unreg, proto, args)		\
	static const char __tpstrtab_##_name[]				\
	__section("__tracepoints_strings") = #_name;			\
	extern struct static_call_key STATIC_CALL_KEY(tp_func_##_name);	\
	int __traceiter_##_name(void *__data, proto);			\
	struct tracepoint __tracepoint_##_name	__used			\
	__section("__tracepoints") = {					\
		.name = __tpstrtab_##_name,				\
		.key = STATIC_KEY_INIT_FALSE,				\
		.static_call_key = &STATIC_CALL_KEY(tp_func_##_name),	\
		.static_call_tramp = STATIC_CALL_TRAMP_ADDR(tp_func_##_name), \
		.iterator = &__traceiter_##_name,			\
		.regfunc = _reg,					\
		.unregfunc = _unreg,					\
		.funcs = NULL };					\
	__TRACEPOINT_ENTRY(_name);					\
	int __traceiter_##_name(void *__data, proto)			\
	{								\
		struct tracepoint_func *it_func_ptr;			\
		void *it_func;						\
									\
		it_func_ptr =						\
			rcu_dereference_raw((&__tracepoint_##_name)->funcs); \
		do {							\
			it_func = (it_func_ptr)->func;			\
			__data = (it_func_ptr)->data;			\

			((void(*)(void *, proto))(it_func))(__data, args); \

			^^^^ called above ^^^^

Where args is unique for every tracepoint, but func is simply a void
pointer.

-- Steve


		} while ((++it_func_ptr)->func);			\
		return 0;						\
	}								\