netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next 4/5] bpf: Add bpf_get_func

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: <YN1+9osJ4NhqZK/j@krava>
Date:   Thu, 1 Jul 2021 10:38:14 +0200
From:   Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To:     Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc:     Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        bpf@...r.kernel.org, Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 4/5] bpf: Add bpf_get_func_ip helper for kprobe
 programs

On Thu, Jul 01, 2021 at 08:58:54AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:

SNIP

> > >   		return &bpf_override_return_proto;
> > >   #endif
> > > +	case BPF_FUNC_get_func_ip:
> > > +		return &bpf_get_func_ip_proto_kprobe;
> > >   	default:
> > >   		return bpf_tracing_func_proto(func_id, prog);
> > >   	}
> > > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c
> > > index ea6178cb5e33..b07d5888db14 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c
> > > @@ -1570,6 +1570,18 @@ static int kretprobe_event_define_fields(struct trace_event_call *event_call)
> > >   }
> > >   
> > >   #ifdef CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS
> > > +/* Used by bpf get_func_ip helper */
> > > +DEFINE_PER_CPU(u64, current_kprobe_addr) = 0;
> > 
> > Didn't check other architectures. But this should work
> > for x86 where if nested kprobe happens, the second
> > kprobe will not call kprobe handlers.
> 
> No problem, other architecture also does not call nested kprobes handlers.
> However, you don't need this because you can use kprobe_running()
> in kprobe context.
> 
> kp = kprobe_running();
> if (kp)
> 	return kp->addr;

great, that's easier

> 
> BTW, I'm not sure why don't you use instruction_pointer(regs)?

I tried that but it returns function address + 1,
and I thought that could be different on each arch
and we'd need arch specific code to deal with that

thanks,
jirka