Re: [PATCH] selftests/ftrace: Correctly enable event in instance-event.tc

[Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>]

On Tue, 5 Sep 2023 20:54:40 +0800
Zheng Yejian <zhengyejian1@huawei.com> wrote:

> Hi, Steve, Ajay,
> 
> After this patch and run this testcase, I got an use-after-free report
> by KASAN. Short log see [1], full logs see attach "panic.log".
> 
> And by simple bisect, I found it may be introduced by:
> 
>    27152bceea1d ("eventfs: Move tracing/events to eventfs")
> 
> Link: 
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=27152bceea1df27ffebb12ac9cd9adbf2c4c3f35
> 
> [1]
> # ./ftracetest test.d/instances/instance-event.tc
> === Ftrace unit tests ===
> [1] Test creation and deletion of trace instances while setting an 
> event[   89.472397] 
> ==================================================================
> [   89.475053] BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in 
> __ftrace_event_enable_disable+0x1b/0x3a0
> [   89.480039] Read of size 8 at addr ffff88814f5b2690 by task 
> ftracetest/392
> [   89.483906]
> [   89.484560] CPU: 10 PID: 392 Comm: ftracetest Tainted: G        W 
>       6.5.0+ #127
> [   89.487033] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), 
> BIOS rel-1.15.0-0-g2dd4b9b3f840-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014
> [   89.489751] Call Trace:
> [   89.490315]  <TASK>
> [   89.490817]  dump_stack_lvl+0x4b/0x80
> [   89.491570]  print_report+0xd0/0x620
> [   89.492296]  ? __virt_addr_valid+0xf9/0x180
> [   89.493134]  ? __ftrace_event_enable_disable+0x1b/0x3a0
> [   89.494151]  kasan_report+0xb6/0xf0
> [   89.494881]  ? __ftrace_event_enable_disable+0x1b/0x3a0
> [   89.495878]  __ftrace_event_enable_disable+0x1b/0x3a0
> [   89.496805]  event_enable_write+0x109/0x170
> [   89.497631]  ? __pfx_event_enable_write+0x10/0x10
> [   89.498618]  ? __pfx_bpf_lsm_file_permission+0x10/0x10
> [   89.499659]  ? security_file_permission+0x51/0x2d0
> [   89.500604]  vfs_write+0x175/0x670
> [   89.501385]  ? __pfx_vfs_write+0x10/0x10
> [   89.502246]  ? __pfx__raw_spin_lock+0x10/0x10
> [   89.503187]  ? expand_files+0x9b/0x330
> [   89.504011]  ? __pfx_expand_files+0x10/0x10
> [   89.504898]  ? set_close_on_exec+0x7b/0xe0
> [   89.505782]  ? __fget_light+0xae/0x1e0
> [   89.506615]  ? _raw_spin_lock+0x85/0xe0
> [   89.507989]  ksys_write+0xbd/0x160
> [   89.509302]  ? __pfx_ksys_write+0x10/0x10
> [   89.510493]  ? dnotify_flush+0x38/0x220
> [   89.511654]  ? fpregs_assert_state_consistent+0x5a/0x70
> [   89.513297]  ? exit_to_user_mode_prepare+0x32/0x110
> [   89.514692]  do_syscall_64+0x3f/0x90
> [   89.515516]  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6e/0xd8

I wonder if this is related to:

  https://lore.kernel.org/all/202309050916.58201dc6-oliver.sang@intel.com/

Which I'm currently debugging.

-- Steve