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: <20230710181601.438b79a8@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Mon, 10 Jul 2023 18:16:01 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     "Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>,
        linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] tracing/probes: Fix to record 0-length data_loc
 in fetch_store_string*() if fails

On Sat,  8 Jul 2023 11:48:58 +0900
"Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:

> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_probe_kernel.h
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_probe_kernel.h
> @@ -55,8 +55,7 @@ fetch_store_string_user(unsigned long addr, void *dest, void *base)
>  	__dest = get_loc_data(dest, base);
>  
>  	ret = strncpy_from_user_nofault(__dest, uaddr, maxlen);
> -	if (ret >= 0)
> -		*(u32 *)dest = make_data_loc(ret, __dest - base);
> +	*(u32 *)dest = make_data_loc((ret >= 0) ? ret : 0, __dest - base);
>  
>  	return ret;
>  }
> @@ -87,8 +86,7 @@ fetch_store_string(unsigned long addr, void *dest, void *base)
>  	 * probing.
>  	 */
>  	ret = strncpy_from_kernel_nofault(__dest, (void *)addr, maxlen);
> -	if (ret >= 0)
> -		*(u32 *)dest = make_data_loc(ret, __dest - base);
> +	*(u32 *)dest = make_data_loc((ret >= 0) ? ret : 0, __dest - base);

The above is a complex line, and not something that I think should be cut
and pasted between two different locations.

I know you took out the set_data_loc() helper, but really it should have
stayed, and have used that to update this code in the two places it
affected, instead of making the changes in those two locations.

That is, patch 3 could have had kept.

static nokprobe_inline void set_data_loc(int ret, void *dest, void *__dest, void *base)
{
	if (ret >= 0)
		*(u32 *)dest = make_data_loc(ret, __dest - base);
}

And this patch could have been:

static nokprobe_inline void set_data_loc(int ret, void *dest, void *__dest, void *base)
{
	*(u32 *)dest = make_data_loc(ret, __dest - base);
}

That would keep the complexity down in this changes set.

-- Steve


>  
>  	return ret;
>  }

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ