From: "Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@kernel.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org>
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
rcu@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] fprobe: Protect fprobe_return() with guard(rcu)()
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2026 09:35:50 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <179055575009.241711.6358052647499787191.stgit@devnote2> (raw)
Hi,
Here is a bugfix (possible UAF) for fprobe found by Sashiko[1].
[1] https://sashiko.dev/#/bug/linux-e46bcd68-4a56-4f19-a255-e3772980e5e3
I think this fix is a short-term fix to make it safer. Eventually
I would like to replace all guard(rcu)() from fprobe with
preempt_disable_notrace(), because currently it introduces unneeded
overhead to fprobe.
- Introduce new call_rcu_tasks_rude() for async call.
- Add special non-preempt mode flag to rhashtable, which
uses call_rcu_tasks_rude() instead of call_rcu()
- Switching to use synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude() for unregistering.
- Replace call_rcu() with call_rcu_tasks_rude() in BPF.
But this is heavy depends on Tasks RCU, so I would like to check
with the RCU maintainers whether this idea aligns with the concept
behind Tasks RCU updates.
Thanks,
---
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) (1):
fprobe: Protect fprobe_return() with guard(rcu)()
kernel/trace/fprobe.c | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
--
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
next reply other threads:[~2026-09-28 0:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-28 0:35 Masami Hiramatsu (Google) [this message]
2026-09-28 0:35 ` Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2026-09-28 16:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-29 0:13 ` Masami Hiramatsu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=179055575009.241711.6358052647499787191.stgit@devnote2 \
--to=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®