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]
Date:   Wed, 9 Aug 2023 12:28:38 +0200
From:   Florent Revest <revest@...omium.org>
To:     "Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>,
        bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/6] fprobe: Use fprobe_regs in fprobe entry handler

On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 8:48 AM Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
<mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org>
>
> This allows fprobes to be available with CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS
> instead of CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_REGS, then we can enable fprobe
> on arm64.

This patch lets fprobe code build on configs WITH_ARGS and !WITH_REGS
but fprobe wouldn't run on these builds because fprobe still registers
to ftrace with FTRACE_OPS_FL_SAVE_REGS, which would fail on
!WITH_REGS. Shouldn't we also let the fprobe_init callers decide
whether they want REGS or not ?

>  static int
>  kprobe_multi_link_handler(struct fprobe *fp, unsigned long fentry_ip,
> -                         unsigned long ret_ip, struct pt_regs *regs,
> +                         unsigned long ret_ip, struct ftrace_regs *fregs,
>                           void *data)
>  {
>         struct bpf_kprobe_multi_link *link;
> +       struct pt_regs *regs = ftrace_get_regs(fregs);
> +
> +       if (!regs)
> +               return 0;

(with the above comment addressed) this means that BPF multi_kprobe
would successfully attach on builds WITH_ARGS but the programs would
never actually run because here regs would be 0. This is a confusing
failure mode for the user. I think that if multi_kprobe won't work
(because we don't have a pt_regs conversion path yet), the user should
be notified at attachment time that they won't be getting any events.
That's why I think kprobe_multi should inform fprobe_init that it
wants FTRACE_OPS_FL_SAVE_REGS and fail if that's not possible (no
trampoline for it for example)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ