linux-kernel - Re: [BUG?] ppc64le: fentry BPF not triggered after live patch (v6.14)

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: <c7c3936c-7be5-4b8f-8766-b4b156ac0390@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2025 01:15:11 +0530
From: Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, Naveen N Rao <naveen@...nel.org>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@...e.com>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
        Vishal Chourasia <vishalc@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Mahesh J Salgaonkar <mahesh@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>,
        Michal Suchánek <msuchanek@...e.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, live-patching@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BUG?] ppc64le: fentry BPF not triggered after live patch (v6.14)



On 07/04/25 1:52 pm, Hari Bathini wrote:
> 
> 
> On 04/04/25 12:03 am, Song Liu wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2025 at 8:30 AM Naveen N Rao <naveen@...nel.org> wrote:
>> [...]
>>>
>>> We haven't addressed this particular interaction in the powerpc support
>>> for ftrace direct and BPF trampolines. Right now, live patching takes
>>> priority so we call the livepatch'ed function and skip further ftrace
>>> direct calls.
>>>
>>> I'm curious if this works on arm64 with which we share support for
>>> DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_CALL_OPS.
>>
>> We still need to land [1] for arm64 to support livepatch. In a quick test
>> with [1], livepatch and bpf trampoline works together. I haven't looked
>> into the arm64 JIT code, so I am not sure whether all the corner cases
>> are properly handled.
>>
>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/live-patching/20250320171559.3423224-1- 
>> song@...nel.org/
> 
> Thanks for checking this on arm64, Song.
> As Naveen pointed out, with out of line trampoline
> on ppc64le, there are a few things to sort out with
> regard to livepatch & BPF Trampoline interaction. Will
> try and take a stab at it soon.

Sorry, couldn't get to it sooner.
Posted the change that fixes livepatch & BPF trampoline
interaction in powerpc upstream now. Please take a look:

  
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251002192755.86441-1-hbathini@linux.ibm.com/

- Hari