| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20250319213707.1784775-2-song@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 14:37:06 -0700
From: Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-toolchains@...r.kernel.org,
live-patching@...r.kernel.org
Cc: indu.bhagat@...cle.com,
puranjay@...nel.org,
wnliu@...gle.com,
irogers@...gle.com,
joe.lawrence@...hat.com,
jpoimboe@...nel.org,
mark.rutland@....com,
peterz@...radead.org,
roman.gushchin@...ux.dev,
rostedt@...dmis.org,
will@...nel.org,
kernel-team@...a.com,
song@...nel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/2] arm64: Implement arch_stack_walk_reliable
With proper exception boundary detection, it is possible to implment
arch_stack_walk_reliable without sframe.
Note that, arch_stack_walk_reliable does not guarantee getting reliable
stack in all scenarios. Instead, it can reliably detect when the stack
trace is not reliable, which is enough to provide reliable livepatching.
Signed-off-by: Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
---
arch/arm64/Kconfig | 2 +-
arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
2 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
index 940343beb3d4..ed4f7bf4a879 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
@@ -275,6 +275,7 @@ config ARM64
select HAVE_SOFTIRQ_ON_OWN_STACK
select USER_STACKTRACE_SUPPORT
select VDSO_GETRANDOM
+ select HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE
help
ARM 64-bit (AArch64) Linux support.
@@ -2499,4 +2500,3 @@ endmenu # "CPU Power Management"
source "drivers/acpi/Kconfig"
source "arch/arm64/kvm/Kconfig"
-
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c
index 1d9d51d7627f..b0489aad5897 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c
@@ -56,6 +56,7 @@ struct kunwind_state {
enum kunwind_source source;
union unwind_flags flags;
struct pt_regs *regs;
+ bool end_on_unreliable;
};
static __always_inline void
@@ -230,8 +231,26 @@ kunwind_next_frame_record(struct kunwind_state *state)
new_fp = READ_ONCE(record->fp);
new_pc = READ_ONCE(record->lr);
- if (!new_fp && !new_pc)
- return kunwind_next_frame_record_meta(state);
+ if (!new_fp && !new_pc) {
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = kunwind_next_frame_record_meta(state);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ /*
+ * This covers two different conditions:
+ * 1. ret == -ENOENT, unwinding is done.
+ * 2. ret == -EINVAL, unwinding hit error.
+ */
+ return ret;
+ }
+ /*
+ * Searching across exception boundaries. The stack is now
+ * unreliable.
+ */
+ if (state->end_on_unreliable)
+ return -EINVAL;
+ return 0;
+ }
unwind_consume_stack(&state->common, info, fp, sizeof(*record));
@@ -277,21 +296,24 @@ kunwind_next(struct kunwind_state *state)
typedef bool (*kunwind_consume_fn)(const struct kunwind_state *state, void *cookie);
-static __always_inline void
+static __always_inline int
do_kunwind(struct kunwind_state *state, kunwind_consume_fn consume_state,
void *cookie)
{
- if (kunwind_recover_return_address(state))
- return;
+ int ret;
- while (1) {
- int ret;
+ ret = kunwind_recover_return_address(state);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+ while (1) {
if (!consume_state(state, cookie))
- break;
+ return -EINVAL;
ret = kunwind_next(state);
+ if (ret == -ENOENT)
+ return 0;
if (ret < 0)
- break;
+ return ret;
}
}
@@ -324,10 +346,10 @@ do_kunwind(struct kunwind_state *state, kunwind_consume_fn consume_state,
: stackinfo_get_unknown(); \
})
-static __always_inline void
+static __always_inline int
kunwind_stack_walk(kunwind_consume_fn consume_state,
void *cookie, struct task_struct *task,
- struct pt_regs *regs)
+ struct pt_regs *regs, bool end_on_unreliable)
{
struct stack_info stacks[] = {
stackinfo_get_task(task),
@@ -348,11 +370,12 @@ kunwind_stack_walk(kunwind_consume_fn consume_state,
.stacks = stacks,
.nr_stacks = ARRAY_SIZE(stacks),
},
+ .end_on_unreliable = end_on_unreliable,
};
if (regs) {
if (task != current)
- return;
+ return -EINVAL;
kunwind_init_from_regs(&state, regs);
} else if (task == current) {
kunwind_init_from_caller(&state);
@@ -360,7 +383,7 @@ kunwind_stack_walk(kunwind_consume_fn consume_state,
kunwind_init_from_task(&state, task);
}
- do_kunwind(&state, consume_state, cookie);
+ return do_kunwind(&state, consume_state, cookie);
}
struct kunwind_consume_entry_data {
@@ -384,7 +407,22 @@ noinline noinstr void arch_stack_walk(stack_trace_consume_fn consume_entry,
.cookie = cookie,
};
- kunwind_stack_walk(arch_kunwind_consume_entry, &data, task, regs);
+ kunwind_stack_walk(arch_kunwind_consume_entry, &data, task, regs, false);
+}
+
+noinline noinstr int arch_stack_walk_reliable(stack_trace_consume_fn consume_entry,
+ void *cookie, struct task_struct *task)
+{
+ struct kunwind_consume_entry_data data = {
+ .consume_entry = consume_entry,
+ .cookie = cookie,
+ };
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = kunwind_stack_walk(arch_kunwind_consume_entry, &data, task, NULL, true);
+ if (ret == -ENOENT)
+ ret = 0;
+ return ret;
}
struct bpf_unwind_consume_entry_data {
@@ -409,7 +447,7 @@ noinline noinstr void arch_bpf_stack_walk(bool (*consume_entry)(void *cookie, u6
.cookie = cookie,
};
- kunwind_stack_walk(arch_bpf_unwind_consume_entry, &data, current, NULL);
+ kunwind_stack_walk(arch_bpf_unwind_consume_entry, &data, current, NULL, false);
}
static const char *state_source_string(const struct kunwind_state *state)
@@ -456,7 +494,7 @@ void dump_backtrace(struct pt_regs *regs, struct task_struct *tsk,
return;
printk("%sCall trace:\n", loglvl);
- kunwind_stack_walk(dump_backtrace_entry, (void *)loglvl, tsk, regs);
+ kunwind_stack_walk(dump_backtrace_entry, (void *)loglvl, tsk, regs, false);
put_task_stack(tsk);
}
--
2.47.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists