All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
To: "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@altlinux.org>
Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org, libc-dev@lists.llvm.org,
	linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Matheus Castanho <msc@linux.ibm.com>,
	musl@lists.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Linux powerpc new system call instruction and ABI
Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 20:59:05 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1621421721.r9fefebis8.astroid@bobo.none> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210519102403.GA15207@altlinux.org>

Excerpts from Dmitry V. Levin's message of May 19, 2021 8:24 pm:
> On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 12:50:24PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> [...]
>> With this patch, I think the ptrace ABI should mostly be fixed. I think 
>> a problem remains with applications that look at system call return 
>> registers directly and have powerpc specific error cases. Those probably
>> will just need to be updated unfortunately. Michael thought it might be
>> possible to return an indication via ptrace somehow that the syscall is
>> using a new ABI, so such apps can be updated to test for it. I don't 
>> know how that would be done.
> 
> Is there any sane way for these applications to handle the scv case?
> How can they tell that the scv semantics is being used for the given
> syscall invocation?  Can this information be obtained e.g. from struct
> pt_regs?

Not that I know of. Michael suggested there might be a way to add 
something. ptrace_syscall_info has some pad bytes, could
we use one for flags bits and set a bit for "new system call ABI"?

As a more hacky thing you could make a syscall with -1 and see how
the error looks, and then assume all syscalls will be the same.

Thanks,
Nick

> 
> For example, in strace we have the following powerpc-specific code used
> for syscall tampering:
> 
> $ cat src/linux/powerpc/set_error.c
> /*
>  * Copyright (c) 2016-2021 The strace developers.
>  * All rights reserved.
>  *
>  * SPDX-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.1-or-later
>  */
> 
> static int
> arch_set_r3_ccr(struct tcb *tcp, const unsigned long r3,
> 		const unsigned long ccr_set, const unsigned long ccr_clear)
> {
> 	if (ptrace_syscall_info_is_valid() &&
> 	    upeek(tcp, sizeof(long) * PT_CCR, &ppc_regs.ccr))
>                 return -1;
> 	const unsigned long old_ccr = ppc_regs.ccr;
> 	ppc_regs.gpr[3] = r3;
> 	ppc_regs.ccr |= ccr_set;
> 	ppc_regs.ccr &= ~ccr_clear;
> 	if (ppc_regs.ccr != old_ccr &&
> 	    upoke(tcp, sizeof(long) * PT_CCR, ppc_regs.ccr))
> 		return -1;
> 	return upoke(tcp, sizeof(long) * (PT_R0 + 3), ppc_regs.gpr[3]);
> }
> 
> static int
> arch_set_error(struct tcb *tcp)
> {
> 	return arch_set_r3_ccr(tcp, tcp->u_error, 0x10000000, 0);
> }
> 
> static int
> arch_set_success(struct tcb *tcp)
> {
> 	return arch_set_r3_ccr(tcp, tcp->u_rval, 0, 0x10000000);
> }
> 
> 
> -- 
> ldv
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
To: "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@altlinux.org>
Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org, Matheus Castanho <msc@linux.ibm.com>,
	musl@lists.openwall.com, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
	libc-dev@lists.llvm.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: Linux powerpc new system call instruction and ABI
Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 20:59:05 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1621421721.r9fefebis8.astroid@bobo.none> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210519102403.GA15207@altlinux.org>

Excerpts from Dmitry V. Levin's message of May 19, 2021 8:24 pm:
> On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 12:50:24PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> [...]
>> With this patch, I think the ptrace ABI should mostly be fixed. I think 
>> a problem remains with applications that look at system call return 
>> registers directly and have powerpc specific error cases. Those probably
>> will just need to be updated unfortunately. Michael thought it might be
>> possible to return an indication via ptrace somehow that the syscall is
>> using a new ABI, so such apps can be updated to test for it. I don't 
>> know how that would be done.
> 
> Is there any sane way for these applications to handle the scv case?
> How can they tell that the scv semantics is being used for the given
> syscall invocation?  Can this information be obtained e.g. from struct
> pt_regs?

Not that I know of. Michael suggested there might be a way to add 
something. ptrace_syscall_info has some pad bytes, could
we use one for flags bits and set a bit for "new system call ABI"?

As a more hacky thing you could make a syscall with -1 and see how
the error looks, and then assume all syscalls will be the same.

Thanks,
Nick

> 
> For example, in strace we have the following powerpc-specific code used
> for syscall tampering:
> 
> $ cat src/linux/powerpc/set_error.c
> /*
>  * Copyright (c) 2016-2021 The strace developers.
>  * All rights reserved.
>  *
>  * SPDX-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.1-or-later
>  */
> 
> static int
> arch_set_r3_ccr(struct tcb *tcp, const unsigned long r3,
> 		const unsigned long ccr_set, const unsigned long ccr_clear)
> {
> 	if (ptrace_syscall_info_is_valid() &&
> 	    upeek(tcp, sizeof(long) * PT_CCR, &ppc_regs.ccr))
>                 return -1;
> 	const unsigned long old_ccr = ppc_regs.ccr;
> 	ppc_regs.gpr[3] = r3;
> 	ppc_regs.ccr |= ccr_set;
> 	ppc_regs.ccr &= ~ccr_clear;
> 	if (ppc_regs.ccr != old_ccr &&
> 	    upoke(tcp, sizeof(long) * PT_CCR, ppc_regs.ccr))
> 		return -1;
> 	return upoke(tcp, sizeof(long) * (PT_R0 + 3), ppc_regs.gpr[3]);
> }
> 
> static int
> arch_set_error(struct tcb *tcp)
> {
> 	return arch_set_r3_ccr(tcp, tcp->u_error, 0x10000000, 0);
> }
> 
> static int
> arch_set_success(struct tcb *tcp)
> {
> 	return arch_set_r3_ccr(tcp, tcp->u_rval, 0, 0x10000000);
> }
> 
> 
> -- 
> ldv
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2021-05-19 10:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 83+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-06-11  8:12 Linux powerpc new system call instruction and ABI Nicholas Piggin
2020-06-11  8:12 ` Nicholas Piggin
2020-06-11  8:12 ` [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/64s/exception: treat NIA below __end_interrupts as soft-masked Nicholas Piggin
2020-06-11  8:12   ` Nicholas Piggin
2020-07-24 13:25   ` Michael Ellerman
2020-07-24 13:25     ` Michael Ellerman
2020-06-11  8:12 ` [PATCH 2/2] powerpc/64s: system call support for scv/rfscv instructions Nicholas Piggin
2020-06-11  8:12   ` Nicholas Piggin
2020-07-23  6:47   ` Michael Ellerman
2020-07-23 16:48     ` Christophe Leroy
2020-07-23 16:48       ` Christophe Leroy
2020-07-24 10:45       ` Michael Ellerman
2020-07-24 10:45         ` Michael Ellerman
2020-06-11 21:02 ` Linux powerpc new system call instruction and ABI Segher Boessenkool
2020-06-11 21:02   ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-06-14  9:26   ` Nicholas Piggin
2020-06-14  9:26     ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-18 23:13 ` Dmitry V. Levin
2021-05-18 23:13   ` Dmitry V. Levin
2021-05-19  2:50   ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-19  2:50     ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-19  5:01     ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-19  5:01       ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-21 19:40       ` Matheus Castanho
2021-05-21 19:40         ` Matheus Castanho
2021-05-21 19:52         ` Florian Weimer
2021-05-21 19:52           ` Florian Weimer
2021-05-21 20:00           ` Matheus Castanho
2021-05-21 20:00             ` Matheus Castanho
2021-05-21 20:52             ` Dmitry V. Levin
2021-05-21 20:52               ` Dmitry V. Levin
2021-05-24 12:11               ` Matheus Castanho
2021-05-24 12:11                 ` Matheus Castanho
2021-05-24 20:33                 ` Matheus Castanho
2021-05-24 20:33                   ` Matheus Castanho
2021-05-19 10:24     ` Dmitry V. Levin
2021-05-19 10:24       ` Dmitry V. Levin
2021-05-19 10:59       ` Nicholas Piggin [this message]
2021-05-19 10:59         ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-19 12:39         ` Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho
2021-05-19 12:39           ` Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho
2021-05-19 13:26         ` Dmitry V. Levin
2021-05-19 13:26           ` Dmitry V. Levin
2021-05-19 22:51           ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-19 22:51             ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-19 23:27             ` Dmitry V. Levin
2021-05-19 23:27               ` Dmitry V. Levin
2021-05-20  2:40               ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-20  2:40                 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-20  3:06                 ` Dmitry V. Levin
2021-05-20  3:06                   ` Dmitry V. Levin
2021-05-20  5:12                   ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-20  5:12                     ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-19  7:33   ` Joakim Tjernlund
2021-05-19  7:33     ` Joakim Tjernlund
2021-05-19  7:55     ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-19  7:55       ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-19  8:08       ` Joakim Tjernlund
2021-05-19  8:08         ` Joakim Tjernlund
2021-05-19  8:42         ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-19  8:42           ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-19 11:12           ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-19 11:12             ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-19 14:38           ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-05-19 14:38             ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-05-19 15:06             ` Joakim Tjernlund
2021-05-19 15:06               ` Joakim Tjernlund
2021-05-19 15:22               ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-05-19 15:22                 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-05-19 15:36                 ` [musl] " Rich Felker
2021-05-19 15:36                   ` Rich Felker
2021-05-19 18:09                 ` Joakim Tjernlund
2021-05-19 18:09                   ` Joakim Tjernlund
2021-05-19 23:48                   ` [musl] " Rich Felker
2021-05-19 23:48                     ` Rich Felker
2021-05-20  1:06                     ` Dmitry V. Levin
2021-05-20  1:06                       ` Dmitry V. Levin
2021-05-20  2:45                       ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-20  2:45                         ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-20  2:59                         ` Dmitry V. Levin
2021-05-20  2:59                           ` Dmitry V. Levin
2021-05-20  7:20                           ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-05-20  7:20                             ` Nicholas Piggin

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=1621421721.r9fefebis8.astroid@bobo.none \
    --to=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=ldv@altlinux.org \
    --cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
    --cc=libc-dev@lists.llvm.org \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=msc@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=musl@lists.openwall.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.