|
Message-Id: <20180828102126.2cd006bc5c5893422761fc6b@kernel.org> Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 10:21:26 +0900 From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org> To: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, mhiramat@...nel.org, naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>, Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, tony.luck@...el.com, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] x86: stop calling fixup_exception() from kprobe_fault_handler() On Mon, 27 Aug 2018 21:22:19 +0200 Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 9:02 PM Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:56 AM, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com> wrote: > > > This removes the call into exception fixup that was added in > > > commit c28f896634f2 ("[PATCH] kprobes: fix broken fault handling for > > > x86_64"). > > > > > > On X86, kprobe_fault_handler() is called from two places: > > > do_general_protection() (for #GP) and kprobes_fault() (for #PF). > > > In both paths, the fixup_exception() call in the kprobe fault handler is > > > redundant. > > > > > > For #GP, fixup_exception() is called immediately before > > > kprobe_fault_handler() is invoked - if someone wanted to fix up our #GP, > > > they've already done so, no need to try again. (This assumes that the > > > kprobe's fault handler isn't going to do something crazy like changing RIP > > > so that it suddenly points to an instruction that does userspace access.) > > > > This needs review by someone who understands kprobes better than I do. > > What happens if someone puts a kprobe on a uaccess instruction and the > > uaccess subsequently faults? > > Ugh, good point. I'll admit to not having thought about that properly. > > I think that's the "if (unlikely(regs->ip == (unsigned > long)cur->ainsn.insn))" branch in kprobe_fault_handler(), which I'm > not touching. Correct, probing on uaccess is handled by that block. So this fixup_exception() is just for safeness. As Jann said, no_context() handles it correctly, we don't need it. Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org> Thank you! > > For #PF, both without and with my patch, stuff should get fixed up by > the normal pagefault handler, since the fixup happens after the kprobe > handler has fiddled with the exception state. > > For #GP, we're already past the fixup call, and I think both without > and with my patch, nothing will catch it - so I think that's a bug, > but I don't think it's one I'm introducing. > > > > For #PF on a kernel address from kernel space, after the kprobe fault > > > handler has run, we'll go into no_context(), which calls fixup_exception(). > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com> > > > --- > > > arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c | 7 ------- > > > 1 file changed, 7 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c b/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c > > > index 467ac22691b0..7315ac202aad 100644 > > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c > > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c > > > @@ -1021,13 +1021,6 @@ int kprobe_fault_handler(struct pt_regs *regs, int trapnr) > > > if (cur->fault_handler && cur->fault_handler(cur, regs, trapnr)) > > > return 1; > > > > > > - /* > > > - * In case the user-specified fault handler returned > > > - * zero, try to fix up. > > > - */ > > > - if (fixup_exception(regs, trapnr)) > > > - return 1; > > > - > > > /* fixup routine could not handle it. */ > > > } > > > > > > -- > > > 2.19.0.rc0.228.g281dcd1b4d0-goog > > > -- Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.