linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 05/18] x86/hw_breakpoint: introduce arch_reinstall_hw

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]
Message-ID: <aL5ns7h1NaoD9LPg@mdev>
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2025 13:20:51 +0800
From: Jinchao Wang <wangjinchao600@...il.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
	"Naveen N . Rao" <naveen@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
	"Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
	Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
	"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
	Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/18] x86/hw_breakpoint: introduce
 arch_reinstall_hw_breakpoint() for atomic context

On Thu, Sep 04, 2025 at 08:38:32AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2025 at 08:21:02AM +0800, Jinchao Wang wrote:
> > Introduce arch_reinstall_hw_breakpoint() to update hardware breakpoint
> > parameters (address, length, type) without freeing and reallocating the
> > debug register slot.
> > 
> > This allows atomic updates in contexts where memory allocation is not
> > permitted, such as kprobe handlers.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jinchao Wang <wangjinchao600@...il.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/x86/include/asm/hw_breakpoint.h |  1 +
> >  arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c      | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  2 files changed, 51 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/hw_breakpoint.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/hw_breakpoint.h
> > index 0bc931cd0698..bb7c70ad22fe 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/hw_breakpoint.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/hw_breakpoint.h
> > @@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ extern int hw_breakpoint_exceptions_notify(struct notifier_block *unused,
> >  
> >  
> >  int arch_install_hw_breakpoint(struct perf_event *bp);
> > +int arch_reinstall_hw_breakpoint(struct perf_event *bp);
> >  void arch_uninstall_hw_breakpoint(struct perf_event *bp);
> >  void hw_breakpoint_pmu_read(struct perf_event *bp);
> >  void hw_breakpoint_pmu_unthrottle(struct perf_event *bp);
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c b/arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
> > index b01644c949b2..89135229ed21 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
> > @@ -132,6 +132,56 @@ int arch_install_hw_breakpoint(struct perf_event *bp)
> >  	return 0;
> >  }
> >  
> > +/*
> > + * Reinstall a hardware breakpoint on the current CPU.
> > + *
> > + * This function is used to re-establish a perf counter hardware breakpoint.
> > + * It finds the debug address register slot previously allocated for the
> > + * breakpoint and re-enables it by writing the address to the debug register
> > + * and setting the corresponding bits in the debug control register (DR7).
> > + *
> > + * It is expected that the breakpoint's event context lock is already held
> > + * and interrupts are disabled, ensuring atomicity and safety from other
> > + * event handlers.
> > + */
> > +int arch_reinstall_hw_breakpoint(struct perf_event *bp)
> > +{
> > +	struct arch_hw_breakpoint *info = counter_arch_bp(bp);
> > +	unsigned long *dr7;
> > +	int i;
> > +
> > +	lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled();
> > +
> > +	for (i = 0; i < HBP_NUM; i++) {
> > +		struct perf_event **slot = this_cpu_ptr(&bp_per_reg[i]);
> > +
> > +		if (*slot == bp)
> > +			break;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	if (WARN_ONCE(i == HBP_NUM, "Can't find a matching breakpoint slot"))
> > +		return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > +	set_debugreg(info->address, i);
> > +	__this_cpu_write(cpu_debugreg[i], info->address);
> > +
> > +	dr7 = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_dr7);
> > +	*dr7 |= encode_dr7(i, info->len, info->type);
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Ensure we first write cpu_dr7 before we set the DR7 register.
> > +	 * This ensures an NMI never see cpu_dr7 0 when DR7 is not.
> > +	 */
> > +	barrier();
> > +
> > +	set_debugreg(*dr7, 7);
> > +	if (info->mask)
> > +		amd_set_dr_addr_mask(info->mask, i);
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(arch_reinstall_hw_breakpoint);
> 
> Yeah, I think not. For one this is an almost verbatim copy of
> arch_install_hw_breakpoint() with zero re-use. Surely you've been taught
> better?
I introduced this to modify bp_addr in atomic context in my RFC series.
I thought it was clearer to split the introduction and refactor.
And then It was used in the wprobe series, so I left it as introduced
in the RFC series.

I agree your suggestion is right. I am willing to refactor after wprobe.

> 
> And why would we want to export guts like this?
I wanted to introduce a real-time stack corruption debugging tool,
which needs a helper to change bp_addr in atomic context (kprobe handler).
And wprobe needs it also.