linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 04/12] module: Add printk format to add module build ID to stacktraces

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: <YGL9hHFg9Pm4xaNM@alley>
Date:   Tue, 30 Mar 2021 12:29:24 +0200
From:   Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To:     Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>,
        Evan Green <evgreen@...omium.org>,
        Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@...omium.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/12] module: Add printk format to add module build
 ID to stacktraces

On Tue 2021-03-23 19:04:35, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Let's make kernel stacktraces easier to identify by including the build
> ID[1] of a module if the stacktrace is printing a symbol from a module.
> 
> Example:
> 
>  WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 3373 at drivers/misc/lkdtm/bugs.c:83 lkdtm_WARNING+0x28/0x30 [lkdtm]
>  Modules linked in: lkdtm rfcomm algif_hash algif_skcipher af_alg xt_cgroup uinput xt_MASQUERADE hci_uart <modules trimmed>
>  CPU: 3 PID: 3373 Comm: bash Not tainted 5.11 #12 a8c0d47f7051f3e6670ceaea724af66a39c6cec8

I tested it with "echo l >/proc/sysrq-trigger" and I got the following
output:

[   71.905593] CPU: 0 PID: 1762 Comm: bash Kdump: loaded Not tainted 5.12.0-rc5-default+ #167 00000080ffffffff0000000000000000
00000000

It does not looks like an unique build-id.
Any idea what was going wrong?

> --- a/include/linux/kallsyms.h
> +++ b/include/linux/kallsyms.h
> @@ -91,6 +93,7 @@ const char *kallsyms_lookup(unsigned long addr,
>  
>  /* Look up a kernel symbol and return it in a text buffer. */
>  extern int sprint_symbol(char *buffer, unsigned long address);
> +extern int sprint_symbol_stacktrace(char *buffer, unsigned long address);
>  extern int sprint_symbol_no_offset(char *buffer, unsigned long address);
>  extern int sprint_backtrace(char *buffer, unsigned long address);

Could we use a more clear name? It is hard to guess what is
the difference between sprint_*_stacktrace() and sprint_backtrace().

What about sprint_symbol_build_id() ?


> diff --git a/kernel/module.c b/kernel/module.c
> index 30479355ab85..9e9cb502fb33 100644
> --- a/kernel/module.c
> +++ b/kernel/module.c
> @@ -2770,6 +2771,20 @@ static void add_kallsyms(struct module *mod, const struct load_info *info)
>  	}
>  	mod->core_kallsyms.num_symtab = ndst;
>  }
> +
> +static void init_build_id(struct module *mod, const struct load_info *info)
> +{
> +	const Elf_Shdr *sechdr;
> +	unsigned int i;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < info->hdr->e_shnum; i++) {
> +		sechdr = &info->sechdrs[i];
> +		if (!sect_empty(sechdr) && sechdr->sh_type == SHT_NOTE &&
> +		    !build_id_parse_buf((void *)sechdr->sh_addr, mod->build_id,
> +					sechdr->sh_size))
> +			break;
> +	}

Just to be sure. Is this really reliable way how to find the build ID,
please?


> +}
>  #else
>  static inline void layout_symtab(struct module *mod, struct load_info *info)
>  {
> @@ -2778,6 +2793,10 @@ static inline void layout_symtab(struct module *mod, struct load_info *info)
>  static void add_kallsyms(struct module *mod, const struct load_info *info)
>  {
>  }

Best Regards,
Petr