[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20210310185734.332d9d52a26780ba02d09197@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 18:57:34 +0900
From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc: Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org, kuba@...nel.org,
mingo@...hat.com, ast@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
kernel-team@...com, yhs@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip 0/5] kprobes: Fix stacktrace in kretprobes
Hi Josh,
On Mon, 8 Mar 2021 19:19:45 -0600
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 11:52:10AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > So at the kretprobe handler, we have 2 issues.
> > 1) the return address (caller_func+0x15) is not on the stack.
> > this can be solved by searching from current->kretprobe_instances.
> > 2) the stack frame size of kretprobe_trampoline is unknown
> > Since the stackframe is fixed, the fixed number (0x98) can be used.
> >
> > However, those solutions are only for the kretprobe handler. The stacktrace
> > from interrupt handler hit in the kretprobe_trampoline still doesn't work.
> >
> > So, here is my idea;
> >
> > 1) Change the trampline code to prepare stack frame at first and save
> > registers on it, instead of "push". This will makes ORC easy to setup
> > stackframe information for this code.
> > 2) change the return addres fixup timing. Instead of using return value
> > of trampoline handler, before removing the real return address from
> > current->kretprobe_instances.
> > 3) Then, if orc_find() finds the ip is in the kretprobe_trampoline, it
> > checks the contents of the end of stackframe (at the place of regs->sp)
> > is same as the address of it. If it is, it can find the correct address
> > from current->kretprobe_instances. If not, there is a correct address.
> >
> > I need to find how the ORC info is prepared for 1), maybe UNWIND_HINT macro
> > may help?
>
> Hi Masami,
>
> If I understand correctly, for #1 you need an unwind hint which treats
> the instruction *after* the "pushq %rsp" as the beginning of the
> function.
Thanks for the patch. In that case, should I still change the stack allocation?
Or can I continue to use a series of "push/pop" ?
>
> I'm thinking this should work:
OK, Let me test it.
Thanks!
>
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/unwind_hints.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/unwind_hints.h
> index 8e574c0afef8..8b33674288ea 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/unwind_hints.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/unwind_hints.h
> @@ -52,6 +52,11 @@
> UNWIND_HINT sp_reg=ORC_REG_SP sp_offset=8 type=UNWIND_HINT_TYPE_FUNC
> .endm
>
> +#else
> +
> +#define UNWIND_HINT_FUNC \
> + UNWIND_HINT(ORC_REG_SP, 8, UNWIND_HINT_TYPE_FUNC, 0)
> +
> #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
>
> #endif /* _ASM_X86_UNWIND_HINTS_H */
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c b/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c
> index df776cdca327..38ff1387f95d 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c
> @@ -767,6 +767,7 @@ asm(
> /* We don't bother saving the ss register */
> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> " pushq %rsp\n"
> + UNWIND_HINT_FUNC
> " pushfq\n"
> SAVE_REGS_STRING
> " movq %rsp, %rdi\n"
> @@ -790,7 +791,6 @@ asm(
> ".size kretprobe_trampoline, .-kretprobe_trampoline\n"
> );
> NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(kretprobe_trampoline);
> -STACK_FRAME_NON_STANDARD(kretprobe_trampoline);
>
>
> /*
>
--
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists