linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] selftests/ftrace: adjust offset for kprobe syntax error test

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20241203202008.1f30a266@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 20:20:08 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.ibm.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
 linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
 Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, Madhavan Srinivasan
 <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>, "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen@...nel.org>, linuxppc-dev
 <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] selftests/ftrace: adjust offset for kprobe syntax
 error test

On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 18:01:06 -0700
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On 12/2/24 12:41, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Sat, 30 Nov 2024 01:56:21 +0530
> > Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> In 'NOFENTRY_ARGS' test case for syntax check, any offset X of
> >> `vfs_read+X` except function entry offset (0) fits the criterion,
> >> even if that offset is not at instruction boundary, as the parser
> >> comes before probing. But with "ENDBR64" instruction on x86, offset
> >> 4 is treated as function entry. So, X can't be 4 as well. Thus, 8
> >> was used as offset for the test case. On 64-bit powerpc though, any
> >> offset <= 16 can be considered function entry depending on build
> >> configuration (see arch_kprobe_on_func_entry() for implementation
> >> details). So, use `vfs_read+20` to accommodate that scenario too.
> >>
> >> Suggested-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
> >> Signed-off-by: Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.ibm.com>  
> > 
> > Acked-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> > 
> > Shuah,
> > 
> > Can you take this through your tree?  
> 
> Yes I can take it. I do have question about whether this is
> a fix - sounds like it is from the change log.
> 
> Clearly stating that it is a fix will help so it can be picked
> up for stables.

I would say it's a fix, as the test currently fails in certain scenarios
for powerpc.

You can add:

Fixes: 4231f30fcc34a ("selftests/ftrace: Add BTF arguments test cases")

-- Steve