linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 6/8] selftests: tracing: Add a basic testcase for wprobe

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: <20251030090952.befea7f0cecd5518c7fda02c@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2025 09:09:52 +0900
From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Will Deacon
 <will@...nel.org>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Masami Hiramatsu
 (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Peter Zijlstra
 <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
 Jinchao Wang <wangjinchao600@...il.com>, Mathieu Desnoyers
 <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
 Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
 "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Alexander Shishkin
 <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>, Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Aishwarya.TCV@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/8] selftests: tracing: Add a basic testcase for
 wprobe

On Wed, 29 Oct 2025 17:20:04 +0900
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 29 Oct 2025 11:43:17 +0900
> Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> > > Hmm, it seems that jiffies related things are updated frequently
> > > and it may cause interrupt storm or infinit recursive call.
> > 
> > I added another trace_printk() in el1_watchpt(). It seems el1_watchpt()
> > takes too long and there is no time to do any other things.
> > (Note the interval shown below is only within the el1_watchpt function,
> >  and in reality various processes (save/restore registers etc) for
> >  exception handling will be inserted before and after.)
> 
> Forget about this. I found the root cause. The x86 watchpoint exception
> happens after the instruction is executed, the arm64 happens before.
> 
> Thus what we need is to emulate or do single step the hooked instruction
> and restart from the next instruction from the watchpoint exception on
> arm64. I thought hw_breakpoint does that, but doesn't. Should we do this
> in do_watchpoint() or in user_handler?

There is a single step execution code but only for default overflow_handlers.
This is a bit strange becuase other users can not set it up outside of
the arch dependent code. Even if it can, it is simply redundant.

So I made changes below which allow users to set its own custom handler is
compatible with perf default overflow handlers.
I confirmed this works on both arm and arm64.

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
index ab76b36dce82..e12ec95b471e 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
@@ -632,6 +632,7 @@ void do_breakpoint(unsigned long esr, struct pt_regs *regs)
 	addr = instruction_pointer(regs);
 	debug_info = &current->thread.debug;
 
+	trace_printk("breakpoint exception at address: 0x%lx\n", addr);
 	for (i = 0; i < core_num_brps; ++i) {
 		rcu_read_lock();
 
@@ -661,6 +662,7 @@ void do_breakpoint(unsigned long esr, struct pt_regs *regs)
 		rcu_read_unlock();
 	}
 
+	trace_printk("breakpoint handling complete, step=%d\n", step);
 	if (!step)
 		return;
 
diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
index fd1d91017b99..40dd897e26b0 100644
--- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
+++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
@@ -902,6 +902,7 @@ struct perf_event {
 	u64				(*clock)(void);
 	perf_overflow_handler_t		overflow_handler;
 	void				*overflow_handler_context;
+	bool				default_overflow_compatible;
 	struct bpf_prog			*prog;
 	u64				bpf_cookie;
 
@@ -1505,13 +1506,7 @@ extern int perf_event_output(struct perf_event *event,
 static inline bool
 is_default_overflow_handler(struct perf_event *event)
 {
-	perf_overflow_handler_t overflow_handler = event->overflow_handler;
-
-	if (likely(overflow_handler == perf_event_output_forward))
-		return true;
-	if (unlikely(overflow_handler == perf_event_output_backward))
-		return true;
-	return false;
+	return event->default_overflow_compatible;
 }
 
 extern void
diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
index 177e57c1a362..6bbbde82cb21 100644
--- a/kernel/events/core.c
+++ b/kernel/events/core.c
@@ -12946,9 +12946,11 @@ perf_event_alloc(struct perf_event_attr *attr, int cpu,
 	} else if (is_write_backward(event)){
 		event->overflow_handler = perf_event_output_backward;
 		event->overflow_handler_context = NULL;
+		event->default_overflow_compatible = true;
 	} else {
 		event->overflow_handler = perf_event_output_forward;
 		event->overflow_handler_context = NULL;
+		event->default_overflow_compatible = true;
 	}
 
 	perf_event__state_init(event);
diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_wprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_wprobe.c
index 98605b207f43..f2c2f26fd668 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/trace_wprobe.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/trace_wprobe.c
@@ -163,6 +163,8 @@ static void wprobe_perf_handler(struct perf_event *bp,
 static int __register_trace_wprobe(struct trace_wprobe *tw)
 {
 	struct perf_event_attr attr;
+	struct perf_event *bp;
+	int cpu;
 
 	if (tw->bp_event)
 		return -EINVAL;
@@ -179,6 +181,11 @@ static int __register_trace_wprobe(struct trace_wprobe *tw)
 		tw->bp_event = NULL;
 		return ret;
 	}
+	/* Mark wprobe_perf_handler is compatible with default one. */
+	for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
+		bp = per_cpu(*tw->bp_event, cpu);
+		bp->default_overflow_compatible = true;
+	}
 
 	return 0;
 }

-- 
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org>