[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20220608162447.666494-1-flaniel@linux.microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2022 17:24:45 +0100
From: Francis Laniel <flaniel@...ux.microsoft.com>
To: linux-trace-devel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Daniel Kiss <daniel.kiss@....com>,
Francis Laniel <flaniel@...ux.microsoft.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Peter Collingbourne <pcc@...gle.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/1] Remove forget_syscall() from start_thread_common()
Hi.
First, I hope you are fine and the same for your relatives.
With this contribution, I enabled using syscalls:sys_exit_execve and
syscalls:sys_exit_execveat as tracepoints on arm64.
Indeed, before this contribution, the above tracepoint would not print their
information as syscall number was set to -1 by calling forget_syscall().
I tested it by compiling a kernel for arm64 and running it within a VM:
# Perf was compiled with linux kernel source.
root@...arm64:~# perf record -ag -e 'syscalls:sys_exit_execve' -e 'syscalls:sys_enter_execve' &
[1] 263
root@...arm64:~# ls
perf.data share
root@...arm64:~# fg
perf record -ag -e 'syscalls:sys_exit_execve' -e 'syscalls:sys_enter_execve'
^C[ perf record: Woken up 1 times to write data ]
[ perf record: Captured and wrote 0.061 MB perf.data (2 samples) ]
root@...arm64:~# perf script
bash 264 [000] 66.220187: syscalls:sys_enter_execve: filename: 0xaaab05d9d
...
# Below line does not appear without this patch.
ls 264 [000] 66.226848: syscalls:sys_exit_execve: 0x0
...
Forgetting the syscall number before starting a new thread was confirmed to be
a bug [1].
Particularly, the following architectures do not forget the syscall number
before starting a new thread:
* arm (32 bits) EABI: start_thread() sets r7 to previous r7 for ELF FDPIC and
to 0 for other binfmts [2].
* arm (32 bits) OABI: syscall number is set to -1 if
ptrace_report_syscall_entry() failed [3].
* mips: start_thread() does not modify current_thread_info->syscall which is
taken directly from v0 [4, 5].
* riscv: start_thread() does not modify a7 [6].
* x86_64: start_thread_common() does not touch orig_ax which seems to contain
the syscall number [7].
If you see any way to improve this contribution, feel free to share!
Change since:
v1:
* Remove call to forget_syscall() and store previous syscall number in
regs->syscallno unconditionnaly.
Francis Laniel (1):
arm64: Do not forget syscall when starting a new thread.
arch/arm64/include/asm/processor.h | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Best regards and thank you in advance.
---
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/YoT1iLPEbteRTQGZ@arm.com/
[2] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.18-rc6/source/arch/arm/include/asm/
processor.h#L52
[3] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.18-rc6/source/arch/arm/kernel/
ptrace.c#L847
[4] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.18-rc6/source/arch/mips/kernel/
process.c#L52
[5] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.18-rc6/source/arch/mips/kernel/
scall64-n64.S#L85
[6] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.18-rc6/source/arch/riscv/kernel/
process.c#L87
[7] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.18-rc6/source/arch/x86/kernel/
process_64.c#L505
--
2.25.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists