[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1585906281.fbqgtc3kpy.naveen@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2020 15:06:25 +0530
From: "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com>
To: linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, Russell Currey <ruscur@...sell.cc>
Cc: ajd@...ux.ibm.com, dja@...ens.net, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
npiggin@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/7] powerpc/kprobes: Mark newly allocated probes as RO
Russell Currey wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 00:18 +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
>> Naveen N. Rao wrote:
>> > Russell Currey wrote:
>> > > With CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX=y and CONFIG_KPROBES=y, there will
>> > > be one
>> > > W+X page at boot by default. This can be tested with
>> > > CONFIG_PPC_PTDUMP=y and CONFIG_PPC_DEBUG_WX=y set, and checking
>> > > the
>> > > kernel log during boot.
>> > >
>> > > powerpc doesn't implement its own alloc() for kprobes like other
>> > > architectures do, but we couldn't immediately mark RO anyway
>> > > since we do
>> > > a memcpy to the page we allocate later. After that, nothing
>> > > should be
>> > > allowed to modify the page, and write permissions are removed
>> > > well
>> > > before the kprobe is armed.
>> > >
>> > > The memcpy() would fail if >1 probes were allocated, so use
>> > > patch_instruction() instead which is safe for RO.
>> > >
>> > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Axtens <dja@...ens.net>
>> > > Signed-off-by: Russell Currey <ruscur@...sell.cc>
>> > > Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
>> > > ---
>> > > arch/powerpc/kernel/kprobes.c | 17 +++++++++++++----
>> > > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>> > >
>> > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/kprobes.c
>> > > b/arch/powerpc/kernel/kprobes.c
>> > > index 81efb605113e..fa4502b4de35 100644
>> > > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/kprobes.c
>> > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/kprobes.c
>> > > @@ -24,6 +24,8 @@
>> > > #include <asm/sstep.h>
>> > > #include <asm/sections.h>
>> > > #include <linux/uaccess.h>
>> > > +#include <linux/set_memory.h>
>> > > +#include <linux/vmalloc.h>
>> > >
>> > > DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct kprobe *, current_kprobe) = NULL;
>> > > DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct kprobe_ctlblk, kprobe_ctlblk);
>> > > @@ -102,6 +104,16 @@ kprobe_opcode_t *kprobe_lookup_name(const
>> > > char *name, unsigned int offset)
>> > > return addr;
>> > > }
>> > >
>> > > +void *alloc_insn_page(void)
>> > > +{
>> > > + void *page = vmalloc_exec(PAGE_SIZE);
>> > > +
>> > > + if (page)
>> > > + set_memory_ro((unsigned long)page, 1);
>> > > +
>> > > + return page;
>> > > +}
>> > > +
>> >
>> > This crashes for me with KPROBES_SANITY_TEST during the kretprobe
>> > test.
>>
>> That isn't needed to reproduce this. After bootup, disabling
>> optprobes
>> also shows the crash with kretprobes:
>> sysctl debug.kprobes-optimization=0
>>
>> The problem happens to be with patch_instruction() in
>> arch_prepare_kprobe(). During boot, on kprobe init, we register a
>> probe
>> on kretprobe_trampoline for use with kretprobes (see
>> arch_init_kprobes()). This results in an instruction slot being
>> allocated, and arch_prepare_kprobe() to be called for copying the
>> instruction (nop) at kretprobe_trampoline. patch_instruction() is
>> failing resulting in corrupt instruction which we try to
>> emulate/single
>> step causing the crash.
>
> OK I think I've fixed it, KPROBES_SANITY_TEST passes too. I'd
> appreciate it if you could test v9, and thanks again for finding this -
> very embarrassing bug on my side.
Great! Thanks.
I think I should also add appropriate error checking to kprobes' use of
patch_instruction() which would have caught this much more easily.
On a related note, I notice that x86 seems to prefer not having any RWX
pages, and so they continue to do 'module_alloc()' followed by
'set_memory_ro()' and then 'set_memory_x()'. Is that something worth
following for powerpc?
- Naveen
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.
