linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Tomohiro Misono (Fujitsu)" <misono.tomohiro@fujitsu.com>
To: 'Petr Mladek' <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: "'madvenka@linux.microsoft.com'" <madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>,
	"jpoimboe@redhat.com" <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
	"peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"chenzhongjin@huawei.com" <chenzhongjin@huawei.com>,
	"mark.rutland@arm.com" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	"broonie@kernel.org" <broonie@kernel.org>,
	"Keiya Nobuta (Fujitsu)" <nobuta.keiya@fujitsu.com>,
	"sjitindarsingh@gmail.com" <sjitindarsingh@gmail.com>,
	"catalin.marinas@arm.com" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	"will@kernel.org" <will@kernel.org>,
	"jamorris@linux.microsoft.com" <jamorris@linux.microsoft.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"live-patching@vger.kernel.org" <live-patching@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH v3 00/22] arm64: livepatch: Use ORC for dynamic frame pointer validation
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2023 09:40:32 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <TYCPR01MB6993C08EEC0FF360E3FBC2A3E5B39@TYCPR01MB6993.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZADNdp5U+lP10Oqo@alley>

> > <snip>
> > > Testing
> > > =======
> > >
> > > - I have run all of the livepatch selftests successfully. I have written a
> > >   couple of extra selftests myself which I will be posting separately
> > Hi,
> >
> > What test configuration/environment you are using for test?
> > When I tried kselftest with fedora based config on VM, I got errors
> > because livepatch transition won't finish until signal is sent
> > (i.e. it takes 15s for every transition).
> >
> > [excerpt from test result]
> >   ```
> >   $ sudo ./test-livepatch.sh
> >   TEST: basic function patching ... not ok
> >
> >   --- expected
> >   +++ result
> >   @@ -2,11 +2,13 @@
> >    livepatch: enabling patch 'test_klp_livepatch'
> >    livepatch: 'test_klp_livepatch': initializing patching transition
> >    livepatch: 'test_klp_livepatch': starting patching transition
> >   +livepatch: signaling remaining tasks
> >    livepatch: 'test_klp_livepatch': completing patching transition
> >   ```
> 
> It might be interesting to see what process is blocking the
> transition. The transition state is visible in
> /proc/<pid>/patch_state.
> 
> The transition is blocked when a process is in KLP_UNPATCHED state.
> It is defined in include/linux/livepatch.h:
> 
> #define KLP_UNPATCHED	 0
> 
> Well, the timing against the transition is important. The following
> might help to see the blocking processes:
> 
> $> modprobe livepatch-sample ; \
>    sleep 1; \
>    for proc_path in \
>        `grep "\-1"  /proc/*/patch_state | cut -d '/'  -f-3` ; \
>    do \
>        cat $proc_path/comm ; \
>        cat $proc_path/stack ; \
>        echo ===  ; \
>    done
> 
> After this the livepatch has to be manualy disabled and removed
> 
> $> echo 0 >/sys/kernel/livepatch/livepatch_sample/enabled
> $> rmmod livepatch_sample

Thanks for the suggestion. This is quite helpful for debug.
I did some tests and in short, I could run all livepatch selftest successfully
on clang15-built kernel when RANDOMIZE_KSTACK_OFFSET=n.

Below is my analysis. Please let me know if I'm wrong.

When I checked the stack state while being live-patched, I saw some tasks
sleeping after system call are not transitioned. For example, I saw a task with
following stack:
```
sshd
[<0>] do_select+0x5cc/0x64c
[<0>] core_sys_select+0x174/0x210
[<0>] __arm64_sys_pselect6+0x11c/0x384
[<0>] invoke_syscall+0x78/0x108
[<0>] el0_svc_common+0xc0/0xfc
[<0>] do_el0_svc+0x38/0xd0
[<0>] el0_svc+0x34/0x110
[<0>] el0t_64_sync_handler+0x84/0xf0
[<0>] el0t_64_sync+0x190/0x194
```

Then, I noticed that invoke_syscall generates instructions to add random offset
in sp when RANDOMIZE_KSTACK_OFFSET=y, which is true in the above case.
Actually I see that sp can be modified in the binary:
```
$ objdump -d vmlinux --disassemble=invoke_syscall
...
ffff80000803076c <invoke_syscall>:
...
ffff8000080307b4:       9100011f        mov     sp, x8
...
ffff80000803085c:       d65f03c0        ret 
```
This will set the instruction UNRELIABLE as sp value is not deterministic:
  https://github.com/madvenka786/linux/blob/orc_v3/tools/objtool/arch/arm64/decode.c#L173
and in turn will skip the generation of orc data:
  https://github.com/madvenka786/linux/blob/orc_v3/tools/objtool/dcheck.c#L313
I can confirm the orc result in vmlinux:
```
./tools/objtool/objtool --dump vmlinux
...
# no entry in range of invoke_syscall (ffff80000803076c - ffff80000803085c)
ffff800008030764: cfa:sp+0 x29:cfa+0 type:call end:0
ffff800008030874: cfa:(und) x29:(und) type:call end:0
ffff800008030874: cfa:sp+0 x29:cfa+0 type:call end:0
...
```
So, when live-patch is performed, stacktrace of task containing invoke_syscall
cannot be validated in arch_stack_walk_reliable() and transition won't happen
until the fake signal is delivered (unless task's state changes).

It seems that stack validation itself works as intended.
As I said, when RANDOMIZE_KSTACK_OFFSET=n, selftests run fine.
Or am I misunderstood something completely?

Regards,
Tomohiro

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2023-03-03  9:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <0337266cf19f4c98388e3f6d09f590d9de258dc7>
2023-02-02  7:40 ` [RFC PATCH v3 00/22] arm64: livepatch: Use ORC for dynamic frame pointer validation madvenka
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 01/22] objtool: Reorganize CFI code madvenka
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 02/22] objtool: Reorganize instruction-related code madvenka
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 03/22] objtool: Move decode_instructions() to a separate file madvenka
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 04/22] objtool: Reorganize Unwind hint code madvenka
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 05/22] objtool: Reorganize ORC types madvenka
2023-02-18  9:30     ` Suraj Jitindar Singh
2023-03-06 16:45       ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 06/22] objtool: Reorganize ORC code madvenka
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 07/22] objtool: Reorganize ORC kernel code madvenka
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 08/22] objtool: Introduce STATIC_CHECK madvenka
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 09/22] objtool: arm64: Add basic definitions and compile madvenka
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 10/22] objtool: arm64: Implement decoder for Dynamic FP validation madvenka
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 11/22] objtool: arm64: Invoke the decoder madvenka
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 12/22] objtool: arm64: Compute destinations for call and jump instructions madvenka
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 13/22] objtool: arm64: Walk instructions and compute CFI for each instruction madvenka
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 14/22] objtool: arm64: Generate ORC data from CFI for object files madvenka
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 15/22] objtool: arm64: Add unwind hint support madvenka
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 16/22] arm64: Add unwind hints to exception handlers madvenka
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 17/22] arm64: Add kernel and module support for ORC madvenka
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 18/22] arm64: Build the kernel with ORC information madvenka
2023-02-10  7:52     ` Tomohiro Misono (Fujitsu)
2023-02-11  4:34       ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 19/22] arm64: unwinder: Add a reliability check in the unwinder based on ORC madvenka
2023-02-23  4:07     ` Suraj Jitindar Singh
2023-03-06 16:52       ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 20/22] arm64: Define HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS madvenka
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 21/22] arm64: Define TIF_PATCH_PENDING for livepatch madvenka
2023-02-02  7:40   ` [RFC PATCH v3 22/22] arm64: Enable livepatch for ARM64 madvenka
2023-03-01  3:12   ` [RFC PATCH v3 00/22] arm64: livepatch: Use ORC for dynamic frame pointer validation Tomohiro Misono (Fujitsu)
2023-03-02 16:23     ` Petr Mladek
2023-03-03  9:40       ` Tomohiro Misono (Fujitsu) [this message]
2023-03-06 16:58       ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2023-03-06 16:57     ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2023-03-23 17:17   ` Mark Rutland
2023-04-08  3:40     ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2023-04-11 13:25       ` Mark Rutland
2023-04-12  4:17         ` Josh Poimboeuf
2023-04-12  4:48           ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2023-04-12  4:50             ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2023-04-12  5:01             ` Josh Poimboeuf
2023-04-12 14:50               ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2023-04-12 15:52                 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2023-04-13 14:59                   ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2023-04-13 16:30                     ` Josh Poimboeuf
2023-04-15  4:27                       ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2023-04-15  5:05                         ` Josh Poimboeuf
2023-04-15 16:15                           ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2023-04-16  8:21                       ` Indu Bhagat
2023-04-13 17:04     ` Nick Desaulniers
2023-04-13 18:15       ` Jose E. Marchesi
2023-04-15  4:14         ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2023-12-14 20:49     ` ARM64 Livepatch based on SFrame Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2023-12-15 13:04       ` Mark Rutland
2023-12-15 15:15         ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
     [not found] <CADBMgpxQ+oM_TrtKRiREcZoZSk=AfenV_bqOk_Vt-Ov5FPHMvw@mail.gmail.com>
2023-04-08  3:41 ` [RFC PATCH v3 00/22] arm64: livepatch: Use ORC for dynamic frame pointer validation Madhavan T. Venkataraman

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=TYCPR01MB6993C08EEC0FF360E3FBC2A3E5B39@TYCPR01MB6993.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=misono.tomohiro@fujitsu.com \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=chenzhongjin@huawei.com \
    --cc=jamorris@linux.microsoft.com \
    --cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=madvenka@linux.microsoft.com \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=nobuta.keiya@fujitsu.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pmladek@suse.com \
    --cc=sjitindarsingh@gmail.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).