From: u3557@miso.sublimeip.com
To: "Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: "Oleg Nesterov" <oleg@redhat.com>,
"Frederic Weisbecker" <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
"Amnon Shiloh" <u3557@miso.sublimeip.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch_check_bp_in_kernelspace: fix the range check
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 21:33:42 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ffbad99ce24a54ce51dbcd9557f3a993.squirrel@mail.sublimeip.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1353349500.6276.9.camel@gandalf.local.home>
Dear Steve,
> But here, there's no prejudice between tasks. All tasks will now hit the
> breakpoint regardless of if it is being traced or not.
Just to clarify, there is no intention to allow conventional breakpoints
in the vsyscall page - that would indeed be a disaster affecting all other
processes.
The aim of this patch is to allow ptracers to set the x86 debug-registers
of their traced process, so that it stops when it reaches the entry points
of those (few) system-calls that are in the vsyscall page. Note that those
debug registers are anyway swapped at context-switch, so no other processes
are affected.
> Is this really what we want? I mean, isn't syscall tracing in the kernel
> done by a flag set to the task's structure. If the task has a flag set,
> then it does the slow (ptrace) path which handles the breakpoint for the
> user.
Most system-calls can be trapped by the PTRACE_SYSCALL option (and the
later PTRACE_SYSEMU), but those few system-calls on the vsyscall page
defy the intention to trap ALL system-calls. They also cannot be
checkpointed by inserting a trap-instruction (as that, if allowed, would
break all other processes), hence the only alternative left is to have
this patch that fixes the oversight in the design of
PTRACE_SYSCALL/PTRACE_SYSEMU in the presence of a vsyscall page.
Best Regards,
Amnon.
> On Mon, 2012-11-19 at 18:47 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>> On 11/09, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>> >
>> > On 11/09, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Note: TASK_SIZE doesn't look right at least on x86, I think it
>> should
>> > > be replaced by TASK_SIZE_MAX.
>> > > ...
>> > > --- x/arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
>> > > +++ x/arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
>> > > @@ -200,7 +200,7 @@ int arch_check_bp_in_kernelspace(struct
>> > > va = info->address;
>> > > len = get_hbp_len(info->len);
>> > >
>> > > - return (va >= TASK_SIZE) && ((va + len - 1) >= TASK_SIZE);
>> > > + return (va >= TASK_SIZE) || ((va + len - 1) >= TASK_SIZE);
>> >
>> > But actully I'd like to ask another question.
>> >
>> > Can't we add the additional !in_gate_area_no_mm() check to allow
>> > the hw breakpoints in vsyscall?
>> >
>> > Quoting Amnon:
>> >
>> > My service needs to catch the system-calls of its traced son.
>> > Almost all system-calls are caught with PTRACE_SYSCALL, but not those
>> > using the vsyscall page - especially "gettimeofday()" and "time()".
>> >
>> > ...> Is this really what we want? I mean, isn't syscall tracing in
the kernel
> done by a flag set to the task's structure. If the task has a flag set,
> then it does the slow (ptrace) path which handles the breakpoint for the
> user.
>> >
>> > However, the code in "arch/x86/kernel/ptrace.c" forbids catching
>> kernel
>> > addresses.
>> >
>> > I tend to agree with Amnon...
>> >
>> > What do you think?
>>
>> ping ;)
>>
>> I agree the patch I sent is very minor (although it looks like the
>> trivial
>> bugfix to me).
>>
>> Just I think Amnon has a point, shouldn't we change this change like
>> below?
>> (on top of this fixlet).
>>
>> Oleg.
>>
>> --- x/arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
>> +++ x/arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
>> @@ -188,6 +188,11 @@ static int get_hbp_len(u8 hbp_len)
>> return len_in_bytes;
>> }
>>
>> +static inline bool bp_in_gate(unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
>> +{
>> + return in_gate_area_no_mm(start) && in_gate_area_no_mm(end);
>> +}
>> +
>> /*
>> * Check for virtual address in kernel space.
>> */
>> @@ -200,7 +205,8 @@ int arch_check_bp_in_kernelspace(struct
>> va = info->address;
>> len = get_hbp_len(info->len);
>>
>> - return (va >= TASK_SIZE) || ((va + len - 1) >= TASK_SIZE);
>> + return ((va >= TASK_SIZE) || ((va + len - 1) >= TASK_SIZE)) &&
>> + !bp_in_gate(va, va + len - 1);
>
> So we want to allow non privileged to add a breakpoint in a vsyscall
> area even if it happens to lay in kernel space?
>
> Is this really what we want? I mean, isn't syscall tracing in the kernel
> done by a flag set to the task's structure. If the task has a flag set,
> then it does the slow (ptrace) path which handles the breakpoint for the
> user.
>
> But here, there's no prejudice between tasks. All tasks will now hit the
> breakpoint regardless of if it is being traced or not.
>
> -- Steve
>
>
>> }
>>
>> int arch_bp_generic_fields(int x86_len, int x86_type,
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-11-20 10:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-11-09 18:29 Oleg Nesterov
2012-11-09 18:30 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-11-19 17:47 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-11-19 18:25 ` Steven Rostedt
2012-11-20 10:33 ` u3557 [this message]
2012-11-20 15:48 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-11-20 15:55 ` Steven Rostedt
2012-11-20 18:32 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-11-20 23:16 ` u3557
2012-11-21 14:16 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-11-21 17:30 ` Amnon Shiloh
2012-11-22 16:12 ` vdso && cr (Was: arch_check_bp_in_kernelspace: fix the range check) Oleg Nesterov
2012-11-22 20:57 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2012-11-23 0:20 ` vdso && cr (Was: arch_check_bp_in_kernelspace: fix the range Amnon Shiloh
2012-11-23 17:45 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-11-24 12:47 ` Amnon Shiloh
2012-11-23 17:42 ` vdso && cr (Was: arch_check_bp_in_kernelspace: fix the range check) Oleg Nesterov
2012-11-23 9:14 ` arch_check_bp_in_kernelspace: fix the range check Amnon Shiloh
2012-11-23 16:33 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-11-23 17:05 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-11-24 14:14 ` Amnon Shiloh
2012-11-24 13:45 ` Amnon Shiloh
2012-11-25 22:55 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-11-25 23:48 ` Amnon Shiloh
2012-12-02 19:30 ` PTRACE_SYSCALL && vsyscall (Was: arch_check_bp_in_kernelspace: fix the range check) Oleg Nesterov
2012-12-02 23:54 ` u3557
2012-12-04 17:59 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-12-04 22:44 ` u3557
2013-01-08 17:08 ` Pedro Alves
2013-01-09 17:52 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-01-10 6:54 ` u3557
2013-01-12 18:12 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-01-14 2:31 ` u3557
2013-01-14 16:01 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-02-18 1:39 ` prctl(PR_SET_MM) Amnon Shiloh
2013-02-18 5:44 ` prctl(PR_SET_MM) Randy Dunlap
2013-02-18 15:21 ` prctl(PR_SET_MM) Steven Rostedt
2013-02-18 16:33 ` prctl(PR_SET_MM) Amnon Shiloh
2013-02-18 19:49 ` prctl(PR_SET_MM) Steven Rostedt
2013-02-19 6:25 ` prctl(PR_SET_MM) Amnon Shiloh
2013-02-20 8:39 ` prctl(PR_SET_MM) Cyrill Gorcunov
2013-02-20 9:38 ` prctl(PR_SET_MM) Amnon Shiloh
2013-02-20 10:51 ` prctl(PR_SET_MM) Cyrill Gorcunov
2013-02-20 11:16 ` prctl(PR_SET_MM) Amnon Shiloh
2013-02-21 7:46 ` prctl(PR_SET_MM) Amnon Shiloh
2013-02-21 8:00 ` prctl(PR_SET_MM) Cyrill Gorcunov
2013-02-21 8:03 ` prctl(PR_SET_MM) Amnon Shiloh
2013-02-21 8:09 ` prctl(PR_SET_MM) Cyrill Gorcunov
2013-02-21 22:18 ` prctl(PR_SET_MM) Andrew Morton
2013-02-21 22:42 ` prctl(PR_SET_MM) Cyrill Gorcunov
2013-02-22 1:18 ` prctl(PR_SET_MM) Amnon Shiloh
2013-02-22 14:23 ` prctl(PR_SET_MM) Denys Vlasenko
2012-12-05 9:29 ` PTRACE_SYSCALL && vsyscall (Was: arch_check_bp_in_kernelspace: fix the range check) Jan Kratochvil
2012-12-05 13:14 ` u3557
2012-11-26 9:44 ` vdso && cr " Cyrill Gorcunov
2012-11-26 12:27 ` Andrey Wagin
2012-11-26 12:55 ` Amnon Shiloh
2012-11-26 14:18 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2012-11-26 14:26 ` vdso && cr (Was: arch_check_bp_in_kernelspace: fix the range Amnon Shiloh
2012-11-26 14:41 ` vdso && cr Cyrill Gorcunov
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=ffbad99ce24a54ce51dbcd9557f3a993.squirrel@mail.sublimeip.com \
--to=u3557@miso.sublimeip.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mosix@mosix.com.au \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--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
Powered by JetHome