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  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]
Date:   Tue, 15 Sep 2020 15:17:08 +0100
From:   Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To:     Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>
Cc:     bpf@...r.kernel.org, ardb@...nel.org, naresh.kamboju@...aro.org,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
        Yauheni Kaliuta <yauheni.kaliuta@...hat.com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@...il.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...omium.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: bpf: Fix branch offset in JIT

On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 04:53:44PM +0300, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 02:11:03PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > Hi Ilias,
> > 
> > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 07:03:55PM +0300, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
> > > Running the eBPF test_verifier leads to random errors looking like this:
> > > 
> > > [ 6525.735488] Unexpected kernel BRK exception at EL1
> > > [ 6525.735502] Internal error: ptrace BRK handler: f2000100 [#1] SMP
> > 
> > Does this happen because we poison the BPF memory with BRK instructions?
> > Maybe we should look at using a special immediate so we can detect this,
> > rather than end up in the ptrace handler.
> 
> As discussed offline this is what aarch64_insn_gen_branch_imm() will return for
> offsets > 128M and yes replacing the handler with a more suitable message would 
> be good.

Can you give the diff below a shot, please? Hopefully printing a more useful
message will mean these things get triaged/debugged better in future.

Will

--->8

diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/extable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/extable.h
index 840a35ed92ec..b15eb4a3e6b2 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/extable.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/extable.h
@@ -22,6 +22,15 @@ struct exception_table_entry
 
 #define ARCH_HAS_RELATIVE_EXTABLE
 
+static inline bool in_bpf_jit(struct pt_regs *regs)
+{
+	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BPF_JIT))
+		return false;
+
+	return regs->pc >= BPF_JIT_REGION_START &&
+	       regs->pc < BPF_JIT_REGION_END;
+}
+
 #ifdef CONFIG_BPF_JIT
 int arm64_bpf_fixup_exception(const struct exception_table_entry *ex,
 			      struct pt_regs *regs);
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/debug-monitors.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/debug-monitors.c
index 7310a4f7f993..fa76151de6ff 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/debug-monitors.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/debug-monitors.c
@@ -384,7 +384,7 @@ void __init debug_traps_init(void)
 	hook_debug_fault_code(DBG_ESR_EVT_HWSS, single_step_handler, SIGTRAP,
 			      TRAP_TRACE, "single-step handler");
 	hook_debug_fault_code(DBG_ESR_EVT_BRK, brk_handler, SIGTRAP,
-			      TRAP_BRKPT, "ptrace BRK handler");
+			      TRAP_BRKPT, "BRK handler");
 }
 
 /* Re-enable single step for syscall restarting. */
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
index 13ebd5ca2070..9f7fde99eda2 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
@@ -34,6 +34,7 @@
 #include <asm/daifflags.h>
 #include <asm/debug-monitors.h>
 #include <asm/esr.h>
+#include <asm/extable.h>
 #include <asm/insn.h>
 #include <asm/kprobes.h>
 #include <asm/traps.h>
@@ -994,6 +995,21 @@ static struct break_hook bug_break_hook = {
 	.imm = BUG_BRK_IMM,
 };
 
+static int reserved_fault_handler(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned int esr)
+{
+	pr_err("%s generated an invalid instruction at %pS!\n",
+		in_bpf_jit(regs) ? "BPF JIT" : "Kernel runtime patching",
+		instruction_pointer(regs));
+
+	/* We cannot handle this */
+	return DBG_HOOK_ERROR;
+}
+
+static struct break_hook fault_break_hook = {
+	.fn = reserved_fault_handler,
+	.imm = FAULT_BRK_IMM,
+};
+
 #ifdef CONFIG_KASAN_SW_TAGS
 
 #define KASAN_ESR_RECOVER	0x20
@@ -1059,6 +1075,7 @@ int __init early_brk64(unsigned long addr, unsigned int esr,
 void __init trap_init(void)
 {
 	register_kernel_break_hook(&bug_break_hook);
+	register_kernel_break_hook(&fault_break_hook);
 #ifdef CONFIG_KASAN_SW_TAGS
 	register_kernel_break_hook(&kasan_break_hook);
 #endif
diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/extable.c b/arch/arm64/mm/extable.c
index eee1732ab6cd..aa0060178343 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/mm/extable.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/mm/extable.c
@@ -14,9 +14,7 @@ int fixup_exception(struct pt_regs *regs)
 	if (!fixup)
 		return 0;
 
-	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BPF_JIT) &&
-	    regs->pc >= BPF_JIT_REGION_START &&
-	    regs->pc < BPF_JIT_REGION_END)
+	if (in_bpf_jit(regs))
 		return arm64_bpf_fixup_exception(fixup, regs);
 
 	regs->pc = (unsigned long)&fixup->fixup + fixup->fixup;

Powered by blists - more mailing lists