linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/6] fprobe: Use fprobe

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CABRcYmKEd=zmriE8VUnSTvybwA962r60+QaRJZK=KNqYixd_eg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 9 Aug 2023 18:09:51 +0200
From:   Florent Revest <revest@...omium.org>
To:     Masami Hiramatsu <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 Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 4:10 PM Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Florent,
>
> On Wed, 9 Aug 2023 12:28:38 +0200
> Florent Revest <revest@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> > 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 ?
>
> Ah, I think you meant FPROBE_EVENTS? Yes I forgot to add the dependency
> on it. But fprobe itself can work because fprobe just pass the ftrace_regs
> to the handlers. (Note that exit callback may not work until next patch)

No, I mean that fprobe still registers its ftrace ops with the
FTRACE_OPS_FL_SAVE_REGS flag:

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mhiramat/linux.git/tree/kernel/trace/fprobe.c?h=topic/fprobe-ftrace-regs&id=2ca022b2753ae0d2a2513c95f7ed5b5b727fb2c4#n185

Which means that __register_ftrace_function will return -EINVAL on
builds !WITH_REGS:

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mhiramat/linux.git/tree/kernel/trace/ftrace.c?h=topic/fprobe-ftrace-regs&id=2ca022b2753ae0d2a2513c95f7ed5b5b727fb2c4#n338

As documented here:

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mhiramat/linux.git/tree/include/linux/ftrace.h?h=topic/fprobe-ftrace-regs&id=2ca022b2753ae0d2a2513c95f7ed5b5b727fb2c4#n188

There are two parts to using sparse pt_regs. One is "static": having
WITH_ARGS in the config, the second one is "dynamic": a ftrace ops
needs to specify that it doesn't want to go through the ftrace
trampoline that saves a full pt_regs, by not giving
FTRACE_OPS_FL_SAVE_REGS. If we want fprobe to work on builds
!WITH_REGS then we should both remove Kconfig dependencies to
WITH_REGS (like you've done) but also stop passing this ftrace ops
flag.

> >
> > >  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.
>
> Yes, so I changed it will not be compiled in that case.

Ah ok I missed the CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_REGS guard that you keep
between patch 1 and 6 to avoid this case. (after patch 6, it's no
longer an issue) then that's fine.