All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To: rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Matt Mullins <mmullins@mmlx.us>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>, Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>,
	Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>, Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>,
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
	KP Singh <kpsingh@chromium.org>, netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracepoint: Do not fail unregistering a probe due to memory allocation
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 18:12:54 -0500 (EST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1473764147.48847.1605654774757.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201117171904.2d455699@gandalf.local.home>

----- On Nov 17, 2020, at 5:19 PM, rostedt rostedt@goodmis.org wrote:

> On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 13:33:42 -0800
> Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
> 
>> As I think got discussed in the thread, what you had here wouldn't work
>> in a CFI build if the function prototype of the call site and the
>> function don't match. (Though I can't tell if .func() is ever called?)
>> 
>> i.e. .func's prototype must match tp_stub_func()'s.
>> 
> 
> 
> Hmm, I wonder how you handle tracepoints? This is called here:
> 
> include/linux/tracepoint.h:
> 
> 
> #define DEFINE_TRACE_FN(_name, _reg, _unreg, proto, args)		\
>	static const char __tpstrtab_##_name[]				\
>	__section("__tracepoints_strings") = #_name;			\
>	extern struct static_call_key STATIC_CALL_KEY(tp_func_##_name);	\
>	int __traceiter_##_name(void *__data, proto);			\
>	struct tracepoint __tracepoint_##_name	__used			\
>	__section("__tracepoints") = {					\
>		.name = __tpstrtab_##_name,				\
>		.key = STATIC_KEY_INIT_FALSE,				\
>		.static_call_key = &STATIC_CALL_KEY(tp_func_##_name),	\
>		.static_call_tramp = STATIC_CALL_TRAMP_ADDR(tp_func_##_name), \
>		.iterator = &__traceiter_##_name,			\
>		.regfunc = _reg,					\
>		.unregfunc = _unreg,					\
>		.funcs = NULL };					\
>	__TRACEPOINT_ENTRY(_name);					\
>	int __traceiter_##_name(void *__data, proto)			\
>	{								\
>		struct tracepoint_func *it_func_ptr;			\
>		void *it_func;						\
>									\
>		it_func_ptr =						\
>			rcu_dereference_raw((&__tracepoint_##_name)->funcs); \
>		do {							\
>			it_func = (it_func_ptr)->func;			\
>			__data = (it_func_ptr)->data;			\
> 
>			((void(*)(void *, proto))(it_func))(__data, args); \
> 
>			^^^^ called above ^^^^
> 
> Where args is unique for every tracepoint, but func is simply a void
> pointer.

That being said, the called functions have a prototype which match the
caller prototype exactly. So within the tracepoint internal data structures,
this function pointer is indeed a void pointer, but it is cast to a prototype
matching the callees to perform the calls. I suspect that as long as CFI checks
that caller/callees prototypes are compatible at runtime when the actual
calls happen, this all works fine.

Thanks,

Mathieu

> 
> -- Steve
> 
> 
>		} while ((++it_func_ptr)->func);			\
>		return 0;						\
> 	}								\

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

      reply	other threads:[~2020-11-17 23:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-16 22:51 [PATCH] tracepoint: Do not fail unregistering a probe due to memory allocation Steven Rostedt
2020-11-16 23:16 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-17 19:15 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2020-11-17 19:21   ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-17 19:47     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2020-11-17 20:34       ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-17 20:58         ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-17 21:22           ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2020-11-17 22:16             ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-17 23:08               ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2020-11-18  1:11                 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-17 21:08         ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2020-11-18 13:21         ` violating function pointer signature Peter Zijlstra
2020-11-18 13:59           ` Florian Weimer
2020-11-18 14:12             ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-11-18 14:18               ` Florian Weimer
2020-11-18 14:34                 ` [PATCH v3] tracepoint: Do not fail unregistering a probe due to memory allocation Steven Rostedt
2020-11-24  5:59                   ` Matt Mullins
2020-11-18 14:22             ` violating function pointer signature Steven Rostedt
2020-11-18 19:46               ` Alexei Starovoitov
2020-11-18 20:02                 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-18 14:02           ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-18 16:01             ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2020-11-18 16:19               ` David Laight
2020-11-18 16:50           ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-11-18 17:17             ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-18 18:12               ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-11-18 18:31                 ` Florian Weimer
2020-11-18 18:55                   ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-11-18 18:58                   ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-18 18:59                     ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-18 19:11                     ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-11-18 19:33                       ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-18 19:48                         ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-11-18 20:44                           ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-19  8:21                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-11-19  8:36                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-11-19 14:37                         ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-11-19 14:59                           ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-19 16:35                             ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-11-19 17:42                               ` David Laight
2020-11-19 19:27                                 ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-11-19 17:04                             ` Alexei Starovoitov
2020-11-19 17:30                               ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-20  1:31                               ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-11-17 21:33 ` [PATCH] tracepoint: Do not fail unregistering a probe due to memory allocation Kees Cook
2020-11-17 22:19   ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-17 23:12     ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]

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=1473764147.48847.1605654774757.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com \
    --to=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=andriin@fb.com \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=kafai@fb.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=kpsingh@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mmullins@mmlx.us \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
    --cc=yhs@fb.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.