From: Anton Arapov <arapov@gmail.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Ananth Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com>,
David Long <dave.long@linaro.org>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>,
"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Jan Willeke <willeke@de.ibm.com>,
Jim Keniston <jkenisto@us.ibm.com>,
Mark Wielaard <mjw@redhat.com>,
Pratyush Anand <panand@redhat.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 11/11] uprobes/x86: Make arch_uretprobe_is_alive(RP_CHECK_CALL) more clever
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2015 15:11:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150707131158.GK5946@troglodyte.intinfra.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150707012313.GA7557@redhat.com>
On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 03:23:13AM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> The previous change documents that cleanup_return_instances() can't
> always detect the dead frames, the stack can grow. But there is one
> special case which imho worth fixing: arch_uretprobe_is_alive() can
> return true when the stack didn't actually grow, but the next "call"
> insn uses the already invalidated frame.
>
> Test-case:
>
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <setjmp.h>
>
> jmp_buf jmp;
> int nr = 1024;
>
> void func_2(void)
> {
> if (--nr == 0)
> return;
> longjmp(jmp, 1);
> }
>
> void func_1(void)
> {
> setjmp(jmp);
> func_2();
> }
>
> int main(void)
> {
> func_1();
> return 0;
> }
>
> If you ret-probe func_1() and func_2() prepare_uretprobe() hits the
> MAX_URETPROBE_DEPTH limit and "return" from func_2() is not reported.
>
> When we know that the new call is not chained, we can do the more
> strict check. In this case "sp" points to the new ret-addr, so every
> frame which uses the same "sp" must be dead. The only complication is
> that arch_uretprobe_is_alive() needs to know was it chained or not, so
> we add the new RP_CHECK_CHAIN_CALL enum and change prepare_uretprobe()
> to pass RP_CHECK_CALL only if !chained.
>
> Note: arch_uretprobe_is_alive() could also re-read *sp and check if
> this word is still trampoline_vaddr. This could obviously improve the
> logic, but I would like to avoid another copy_from_user() especially
> in the case when we can't avoid the false "alive == T" positives.
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Anton Arapov <arapov@gmail.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c | 5 ++++-
> include/linux/uprobes.h | 1 +
> kernel/events/uprobes.c | 14 +++++++-------
> 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c b/arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c
> index 67eb168..a5c59f2 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c
> @@ -997,5 +997,8 @@ arch_uretprobe_hijack_return_addr(unsigned long trampoline_vaddr, struct pt_regs
> bool arch_uretprobe_is_alive(struct return_instance *ret, enum rp_check ctx,
> struct pt_regs *regs)
> {
> - return regs->sp <= ret->stack;
> + if (ctx == RP_CHECK_CALL) /* sp was just decremented by "call" insn */
> + return regs->sp < ret->stack;
> + else
> + return regs->sp <= ret->stack;
> }
> diff --git a/include/linux/uprobes.h b/include/linux/uprobes.h
> index c0a5402..0bdc72f 100644
> --- a/include/linux/uprobes.h
> +++ b/include/linux/uprobes.h
> @@ -104,6 +104,7 @@ struct return_instance {
>
> enum rp_check {
> RP_CHECK_CALL,
> + RP_CHECK_CHAIN_CALL,
> RP_CHECK_RET,
> };
>
> diff --git a/kernel/events/uprobes.c b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> index df5661a..0f370ef 100644
> --- a/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> +++ b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> @@ -1511,10 +1511,11 @@ static unsigned long get_trampoline_vaddr(void)
> return trampoline_vaddr;
> }
>
> -static void cleanup_return_instances(struct uprobe_task *utask, struct pt_regs *regs)
> +static void cleanup_return_instances(struct uprobe_task *utask, bool chained,
> + struct pt_regs *regs)
> {
> struct return_instance *ri = utask->return_instances;
> - enum rp_check ctx = RP_CHECK_CALL;
> + enum rp_check ctx = chained ? RP_CHECK_CHAIN_CALL : RP_CHECK_CALL;
>
> while (ri && !arch_uretprobe_is_alive(ri, ctx, regs)) {
> ri = free_ret_instance(ri);
> @@ -1528,7 +1529,7 @@ static void prepare_uretprobe(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct pt_regs *regs)
> struct return_instance *ri;
> struct uprobe_task *utask;
> unsigned long orig_ret_vaddr, trampoline_vaddr;
> - bool chained = false;
> + bool chained;
>
> if (!get_xol_area())
> return;
> @@ -1554,14 +1555,15 @@ static void prepare_uretprobe(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct pt_regs *regs)
> goto fail;
>
> /* drop the entries invalidated by longjmp() */
> - cleanup_return_instances(utask, regs);
> + chained = (orig_ret_vaddr == trampoline_vaddr);
> + cleanup_return_instances(utask, chained, regs);
>
> /*
> * We don't want to keep trampoline address in stack, rather keep the
> * original return address of first caller thru all the consequent
> * instances. This also makes breakpoint unwrapping easier.
> */
> - if (orig_ret_vaddr == trampoline_vaddr) {
> + if (chained) {
> if (!utask->return_instances) {
> /*
> * This situation is not possible. Likely we have an
> @@ -1570,8 +1572,6 @@ static void prepare_uretprobe(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct pt_regs *regs)
> uprobe_warn(current, "handle tail call");
> goto fail;
> }
> -
> - chained = true;
> orig_ret_vaddr = utask->return_instances->orig_ret_vaddr;
> }
>
> --
> 1.5.5.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-07 13:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-07 1:22 [PATCH v2 00/11] uprobes: longjmp fixes Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-07 1:22 ` [PATCH v2 01/11] uprobes: Introduce get_uprobe() Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-07 12:44 ` Anton Arapov
2015-07-07 1:22 ` [PATCH v2 02/11] uprobes: Introduce free_ret_instance() Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-07 12:46 ` Anton Arapov
2015-07-07 1:22 ` [PATCH v2 03/11] uprobes: Send SIGILL if handle_trampoline() fails Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-07 12:51 ` Anton Arapov
2015-07-07 1:22 ` [PATCH v2 04/11] uprobes: Change prepare_uretprobe() to use uprobe_warn() Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-07 12:52 ` Anton Arapov
2015-07-07 1:22 ` [PATCH v2 05/11] uprobes: Change handle_trampoline() to find the next chain beforehand Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-07 12:54 ` Anton Arapov
2015-07-07 1:22 ` [PATCH v2 06/11] uprobes: Export struct return_instance, introduce arch_uretprobe_is_alive() Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-07 12:58 ` Anton Arapov
2015-07-10 11:52 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2015-07-07 1:22 ` [PATCH v2 07/11] uprobes/x86: Reimplement arch_uretprobe_is_alive() Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-07 13:02 ` Anton Arapov
2015-07-10 11:53 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2015-07-07 1:23 ` [PATCH v2 08/11] uprobes: Change handle_trampoline() to flush the frames invalidated by longjmp() Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-07 13:05 ` Anton Arapov
2015-07-10 11:55 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2015-07-07 1:23 ` [PATCH v2 09/11] uprobes: Change prepare_uretprobe() to (try to) flush the dead frames Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-07 13:07 ` Anton Arapov
2015-07-10 11:57 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2015-07-07 1:23 ` [PATCH v2 10/11] uprobes: Add the "enum rp_check ctx" arg to arch_uretprobe_is_alive() Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-07 13:08 ` Anton Arapov
2015-07-10 12:06 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2015-07-07 1:23 ` [PATCH v2 11/11] uprobes/x86: Make arch_uretprobe_is_alive(RP_CHECK_CALL) more clever Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-07 13:11 ` Anton Arapov [this message]
2015-07-10 12:07 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2015-07-10 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 00/11] uprobes: longjmp fixes Pratyush Anand
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=20150707131158.GK5946@troglodyte.intinfra.com \
--to=arapov@gmail.com \
--cc=ananth@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dave.long@linaro.org \
--cc=dvlasenk@redhat.com \
--cc=fche@redhat.com \
--cc=jkenisto@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mjw@redhat.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=panand@redhat.com \
--cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=willeke@de.ibm.com \
/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®