From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCCC9C34026 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 11:07:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CBE62173E for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 11:07:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=c-s.fr header.i=@c-s.fr header.b="LUAekyx6" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 7CBE62173E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=c-s.fr Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48MJ3Z6xpLzDqYK for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 22:07:38 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=c-s.fr (client-ip=93.17.236.30; helo=pegase1.c-s.fr; envelope-from=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=c-s.fr Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=c-s.fr header.i=@c-s.fr header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mail header.b=LUAekyx6; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from pegase1.c-s.fr (pegase1.c-s.fr [93.17.236.30]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48MJ0X2ssvzDqDV for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 22:04:59 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from localhost (mailhub1-int [192.168.12.234]) by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48MJ0P1h7Zz9tyN8; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 12:04:53 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: localhost; dkim=pass reason="1024-bit key; insecure key" header.d=c-s.fr header.i=@c-s.fr header.b=LUAekyx6; dkim-adsp=pass; dkim-atps=neutral X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at c-s.fr Received: from pegase1.c-s.fr ([192.168.12.234]) by localhost (pegase1.c-s.fr [192.168.12.234]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9qsA7p1qtCxC; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 12:04:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from messagerie.si.c-s.fr (messagerie.si.c-s.fr [192.168.25.192]) by pegase1.c-s.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48MJ0P0G82z9tyN7; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 12:04:53 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=c-s.fr; s=mail; t=1582023893; bh=IvncdXqvF6Ay4VPFSQXwecooqJD2SMc22e4Bp0u/38U=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=LUAekyx6RBfBAlGEDrsVr+fOPx6OWmEiUFXBjIMhYmvanjjNv3E11MhoucRbgxkvy 2Lde3TwEbH1U63VsLR5aVUmM8f1FBdpA3v4a5nXCP+suYxDyKQMZ7stE12/PfKb/3T tBTj/nLJeQXoGPumh+bJTjppOEDKNFBOjcUiUiH4= Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by messagerie.si.c-s.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id C56D98B7F7; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 12:04:51 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at c-s.fr Received: from messagerie.si.c-s.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (messagerie.si.c-s.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id WVMHyBhVWC-b; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 12:04:50 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.4.90] (unknown [192.168.4.90]) by messagerie.si.c-s.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CBF18B7F1; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 12:04:42 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/kprobes: Fix trap address when trap happened in real mode To: Masami Hiramatsu References: <20200214225434.464ec467ad9094961abb8ddc@kernel.org> <20200216213411.824295a321d8fa979dedbbbe@kernel.org> <20200217192735.5070f0925c4159ccffa4e465@kernel.org> <20200218094421.6d402de389ce23a55a3ec084@kernel.org> <20200218192905.a3ed969e8565901c4f69fa22@kernel.org> From: Christophe Leroy Message-ID: <2b3f664e-d4ad-edd3-5bed-a4492f4ed213@c-s.fr> Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 12:04:41 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200218192905.a3ed969e8565901c4f69fa22@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Anil S Keshavamurthy , Paul Mackerras , stable@kernel.vger.org, "Naveen N. Rao" , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, "David S. Miller" , Larry Finger Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Le 18/02/2020 à 11:29, Masami Hiramatsu a écrit : > On Tue, 18 Feb 2020 06:58:06 +0100 > Christophe Leroy wrote: > >>>>>> >>>>>> What do you mean by 'there' ? At the entry of kprobe_handler() ? >>>>>> >>>>>> That's what my patch does, it checks whether MMU is disabled or not. If >>>>>> it is, it converts the address to a virtual address. >>>>>> >>>>>> Do you mean kprobe_handler() should bail out early as it does when the >>>>>> trap happens in user mode ? >>>>> >>>>> Yes, that is what I meant. >>>>> >>>>>> Of course we can do that, I don't know >>>>>> enough about kprobe to know if kprobe_handler() should manage events >>>>>> that happened in real-mode or just ignore them. But I tested adding an >>>>>> event on a function that runs in real-mode, and it (now) works. >>>>>> >>>>>> So, what should we do really ? >>>>> >>>>> I'm not sure how the powerpc kernel runs in real mode. >>>>> But clearly, at least kprobe event can not handle that case because >>>>> it tries to access memory by probe_kernel_read(). Unless that function >>>>> correctly handles the address translation, I want to prohibit kprobes >>>>> on such address. >>>>> >>>>> So what I would like to see is, something like below. >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/kprobes.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/kprobes.c >>>>> index 2d27ec4feee4..4771be152416 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/kprobes.c >>>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/kprobes.c >>>>> @@ -261,7 +261,7 @@ int kprobe_handler(struct pt_regs *regs) >>>>> unsigned int *addr = (unsigned int *)regs->nip; >>>>> struct kprobe_ctlblk *kcb; >>>>> >>>>> - if (user_mode(regs)) >>>>> + if (user_mode(regs) || !(regs->msr & MSR_IR)) >>>>> return 0; >>>>> >>>>> /* >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> With this instead change of my patch, I get an Oops everytime a kprobe >>>> event occurs in real-mode. >>>> >>>> This is because kprobe_handler() is now saying 'this trap doesn't belong >>>> to me' for a trap that has been installed by it. >>> >>> Hmm, on powerpc, kprobes is allowed to probe on the code which runs >>> in the real mode? I think we should also prohibit it by blacklisting. >>> (It is easy to add blacklist by NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(func)) >> >> Yes, I see a lot of them tagged with _ASM_NOKPROBE_SYMBOL() on PPC64, >> but none on PPC32. I suppose that's missing and have to be added. > > Ah, you are using PPC32. > >> Nevertheless, if one symbol has been forgotten in the blacklist, I think >> it is a problem if it generate Oopses. > > There is a long history also on x86 to make a blacklist. Anyway, how did > you get this error on PPC32? Somewhere would you like to probe and > it is a real mode function? Or, it happened unexpectedly? The first Oops I got was triggered by a WARN_ON() kind of trap in real mode. The trap exception handler called kprobe_handler() which tried to read the instruction at the trap address (which was a real-mode address) so it triggered a Bad Access Fault. This was initially the purpose of my patch. After discussion with you, I started looking at what would be the effect of setting a kprobe event in a function which runs in real mode. > >> >>> Or, some parts are possble to run under both real mode and kernel mode? >> >> I don't think so, at least on PPC32 > > OK, that's a good news. Also, are there any independent section where such > real mode functions are stored? (I can see start_real_trampolines in > sections.h) If that kind of sections are defined, it is easy to make > a blacklist in arch_populate_kprobe_blacklist(). See arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c. Part of them are in .head.text, and this section is already blacklisted throught function arch_within_kprobe_blacklist() But there are several other functions which are not there. For instance, many things within entry_32.S, and also things in hash_low.S On PPC64 (ie in entry_64.S) they were explicitely blacklisted with _ASM_NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(). We have to do the same on PPC64 > > >>>> So the 'program check' exception handler doesn't find the owner of the >>>> trap hence generate an Oops. >>>> >>>> Even if we don't want kprobe() to proceed with the event entirely >>>> (allthough it works at least for simple events), I'd expect it to fail >>>> gracefully. >>> >>> Agreed. I thought it was easy to identify real mode code. But if it is >>> hard, we should apply your first patch and also skip user handlers >>> if we are in the real mode (and increment missed count). >> >> user handlers are already skipped. > > Yes, if you don't put a kprobes on real mode code. However, if user > (accidentally) puts a probe on real mode code, it might call a > user handler? Are we talking about the same thing ? Only kernel code can run in real mode, so the following code at the beginning of kprobe_handler() does the job ? if (user_mode(regs)) return 0; > >> >> What do you think about my latest proposal below ? If a trap is >> encoutered in real mode, if checks if the matching virtual address >> corresponds to a valid kprobe. If it is, it skips it. If not, it returns >> 0 to tell "it's no me". You are also talking about incrementing the >> missed count. Who do we do that ? > > I rather like your first patch. If there is a kprobes, we can not skip > the instruction, because there is an instruction which must be executed. > (or single-skipped, but I'm not sure the emulator works correctly on > real mode) Oops, yes of course. Christophe