| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <202201250403.5YnZvb4K-lkp@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2022 06:23:13 +0800
From: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Cc: kbuild-all@...ts.01.org, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
bpf@...r.kernel.org, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/9] arm64: rethook: Add arm64 rethook implementation
Hi Masami,
I love your patch! Yet something to improve:
[auto build test ERROR on rostedt-trace/for-next]
[also build test ERROR on arm64/for-next/core tip/x86/core linus/master v5.17-rc1 next-20220124]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch]
url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Masami-Hiramatsu/fprobe-Introduce-fprobe-function-entry-exit-probe/20220125-001253
base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rostedt/linux-trace.git for-next
config: arm64-randconfig-r033-20220124 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20220125/202201250403.5YnZvb4K-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: aarch64-linux-gcc (GCC) 11.2.0
reproduce (this is a W=1 build):
wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
# https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commit/981b0378461c912ba2d7b10412dd6fe21c316055
git remote add linux-review https://github.com/0day-ci/linux
git fetch --no-tags linux-review Masami-Hiramatsu/fprobe-Introduce-fprobe-function-entry-exit-probe/20220125-001253
git checkout 981b0378461c912ba2d7b10412dd6fe21c316055
# save the config file to linux build tree
mkdir build_dir
COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=gcc-11.2.0 make.cross O=build_dir ARCH=arm64 SHELL=/bin/bash arch/arm64/kernel/
If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c: In function 'unwind_frame':
>> arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c:141:73: error: 'struct stackframe' has no member named 'kr_cur'
141 | frame->pc = rethook_find_ret_addr(tsk, frame->fp, &frame->kr_cur);
| ^~
vim +141 arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c
59
60 /*
61 * Unwind from one frame record (A) to the next frame record (B).
62 *
63 * We terminate early if the location of B indicates a malformed chain of frame
64 * records (e.g. a cycle), determined based on the location and fp value of A
65 * and the location (but not the fp value) of B.
66 */
67 int notrace unwind_frame(struct task_struct *tsk, struct stackframe *frame)
68 {
69 unsigned long fp = frame->fp;
70 struct stack_info info;
71
72 if (!tsk)
73 tsk = current;
74
75 /* Final frame; nothing to unwind */
76 if (fp == (unsigned long)task_pt_regs(tsk)->stackframe)
77 return -ENOENT;
78
79 if (fp & 0x7)
80 return -EINVAL;
81
82 if (!on_accessible_stack(tsk, fp, 16, &info))
83 return -EINVAL;
84
85 if (test_bit(info.type, frame->stacks_done))
86 return -EINVAL;
87
88 /*
89 * As stacks grow downward, any valid record on the same stack must be
90 * at a strictly higher address than the prior record.
91 *
92 * Stacks can nest in several valid orders, e.g.
93 *
94 * TASK -> IRQ -> OVERFLOW -> SDEI_NORMAL
95 * TASK -> SDEI_NORMAL -> SDEI_CRITICAL -> OVERFLOW
96 *
97 * ... but the nesting itself is strict. Once we transition from one
98 * stack to another, it's never valid to unwind back to that first
99 * stack.
100 */
101 if (info.type == frame->prev_type) {
102 if (fp <= frame->prev_fp)
103 return -EINVAL;
104 } else {
105 set_bit(frame->prev_type, frame->stacks_done);
106 }
107
108 /*
109 * Record this frame record's values and location. The prev_fp and
110 * prev_type are only meaningful to the next unwind_frame() invocation.
111 */
112 frame->fp = READ_ONCE_NOCHECK(*(unsigned long *)(fp));
113 frame->pc = READ_ONCE_NOCHECK(*(unsigned long *)(fp + 8));
114 frame->prev_fp = fp;
115 frame->prev_type = info.type;
116
117 frame->pc = ptrauth_strip_insn_pac(frame->pc);
118
119 #ifdef CONFIG_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER
120 if (tsk->ret_stack &&
121 (frame->pc == (unsigned long)return_to_handler)) {
122 unsigned long orig_pc;
123 /*
124 * This is a case where function graph tracer has
125 * modified a return address (LR) in a stack frame
126 * to hook a function return.
127 * So replace it to an original value.
128 */
129 orig_pc = ftrace_graph_ret_addr(tsk, NULL, frame->pc,
130 (void *)frame->fp);
131 if (WARN_ON_ONCE(frame->pc == orig_pc))
132 return -EINVAL;
133 frame->pc = orig_pc;
134 }
135 #endif /* CONFIG_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER */
136 #ifdef CONFIG_KRETPROBES
137 if (is_kretprobe_trampoline(frame->pc))
138 frame->pc = kretprobe_find_ret_addr(tsk, (void *)frame->fp, &frame->kr_cur);
139 #endif
140 if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RETHOOK) && is_rethook_trampoline(frame->pc))
> 141 frame->pc = rethook_find_ret_addr(tsk, frame->fp, &frame->kr_cur);
142
143 return 0;
144 }
145 NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(unwind_frame);
146
---
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service, Intel Corporation
https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/kbuild-all@lists.01.org
Powered by blists - more mailing lists