linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] riscv: provide riscv-specific is_trap

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:   Tue, 29 Aug 2023 10:12:28 +0200
From:   Nam Cao <namcaov@...il.com>
To:     Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
Cc:     Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        bjorn@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: provide riscv-specific is_trap_insn()

On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 07:26:54AM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 01:56:34PM +0800, Guo Ren wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 4:56 AM Nam Cao <namcaov@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > uprobes expects is_trap_insn() to return true for any trap instructions,
> > > not just the one used for installing uprobe. The current default
> > > implementation only returns true for 16-bit c.ebreak if C extension is
> > > enabled. This can confuse uprobes if a 32-bit ebreak generates a trap
> > > exception from userspace: uprobes asks is_trap_insn() who says there is no
> > > trap, so uprobes assume a probe was there before but has been removed, and
> > > return to the trap instruction. This cause an infinite loop of entering
> > > and exiting trap handler.
> > >
> > > Instead of using the default implementation, implement this function
> > > speficially for riscv which checks for both ebreak and c.ebreak.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 74784081aac8 ("riscv: Add uprobes supported")
> > > Signed-off-by: Nam Cao <namcaov@...il.com>
> > > ---
> > >  arch/riscv/kernel/probes/uprobes.c | 10 ++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/probes/uprobes.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/probes/uprobes.c
> > > index 194f166b2cc4..91f4ce101cd1 100644
> > > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/probes/uprobes.c
> > > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/probes/uprobes.c
> > > @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
> > >  #include <linux/highmem.h>
> > >  #include <linux/ptrace.h>
> > >  #include <linux/uprobes.h>
> > > +#include <asm/insn.h>
> > >
> > >  #include "decode-insn.h"
> > >
> > > @@ -17,6 +18,15 @@ bool is_swbp_insn(uprobe_opcode_t *insn)
> > >  #endif
> > >  }
> >  >
> > > +bool is_trap_insn(uprobe_opcode_t *insn)
> > > +{
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_C
> 
> > Can we remove the CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_C? As you said, "uprobes expects
> > is_trap_insn() to return true for any trap instructions". So userspace
> > wouldn't be limited by CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_C.
> 
> Isn't the RISCV_ISA_C required because there's a different encoding for
> EBREAK vs C_EBREAK?

riscv_insn_is_c_ebreak() can be used without enabling RISCV_ISA_C, so no it's
not required.

Best regards,
Nam