Hi, On 1/17/19 10:47 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 09:08:41 +0100 > Andreas Ziegler wrote: > >> On 17.01.19 09:00, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: >>> On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:13:09 +0900 >>> Masami Hiramatsu wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 11:16:07 +0100 >>>> Andreas Ziegler wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> I went into this a bit deeper today, and right now it is simply failing >>>>> to parse the code because there is no FETCH_OP_COMM case in >>>>> process_fetch_insn() for uprobes so that will return -EILSEQ, leading to >>>>> a make_data_loc(0, ...) in store_trace_args(). If we just add >>>>> FETCH_OP_COMM and let val point to current->comm (that's what >>>>> trace_kprobe.c does), we get an -EFAULT return value from >>>>> fetch_store_string because strncpy_from_user() checks if the argument is >>>>> in user space. >>>> >>>> Correct. I missed to add OP_COMM support. And uprobe's fetch_store_string >>>> is only for user space strings. >>>> >>>>> So I think we might need a special case for that, something like >>>>> FETCH_OP_ST_COMM_STRING which is only used for FETCH_OP_COMM and copies >>>>> current->comm over to the dynamic area. The implementation could be >>>>> similar to the old fetch_comm_string implementation before your rewrite. >>>> >>>> Hmm, instead, I would like to add current->comm checker and only allows >>>> to copy that. That would be simpler and enough. >>>> >>>> Could you test below patch? >>>> >>>> >>>> tracing: uprobes: Re-enable $comm support for uprobe events >>>> >>>> From: Masami Hiramatsu >>>> >>>> Since commit 533059281ee5 ("tracing: probeevent: Introduce new >>>> argument fetching code") dropped the $comm support from uprobe >>>> events, this re-enable it. >> >> this should read 're-enables'. >> >>>> >>>> For $comm support, use strncpy() instead of strncpy_from_user() >> ^ >> we're using strlcpy(), not strncpy(). >> >>>> to copy current task's comm. Because it is in the kernel space, >>>> strncpy_from_user() always fails to copy the comm. >>>> This also use strlen() instead of strlen_user() to measure the >> ^ ^ >> 'uses', and the function should be 'strnlen_user()'. >> >>>> length of the comm. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu >>>> Reported-by: Andreas Ziegler >>>> --- >>>> kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 13 +++++++++++-- >>>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c >>>> index e335576b9411..97d134e83e0f 100644 >>>> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c >>>> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c >>>> @@ -156,7 +156,10 @@ fetch_store_string(unsigned long addr, void *dest, void *base) >>>> if (unlikely(!maxlen)) >>>> return -ENOMEM; >>>> >>>> - ret = strncpy_from_user(dst, src, maxlen); >>>> + if (addr == (unsigned long)current->comm) >>>> + ret = strlcpy(dst, current->comm, maxlen); >>>> + else >>>> + ret = strncpy_from_user(dst, src, maxlen); >>>> if (ret >= 0) { >>>> if (ret == maxlen) >>>> dst[ret - 1] = '\0'; >>>> @@ -173,7 +176,10 @@ fetch_store_strlen(unsigned long addr) >>>> int len; >>>> void __user *vaddr = (void __force __user *) addr; >>>> >>>> - len = strnlen_user(vaddr, MAX_STRING_SIZE); >>>> + if (addr == (unsigned long)current->comm) >>>> + len = strlen(current->comm); >>> >>> To balance with the strnlen_user, we must increse the len in this block. >>> (strlen doesn't count the final '\0', but strnlen_user counts it) >>> >> >> yes, we need to add a '+ 1' here. >> >> With the typos and this one fixed, this is >> >> Acked-by: Andreas Ziegler > > Thank you for fixing typo and Ack :) > > Thanks you, > >> >>> Thank you, >>> >>>> + else >>>> + len = strnlen_user(vaddr, MAX_STRING_SIZE); >>>> >>>> return (len > MAX_STRING_SIZE) ? 0 : len; >>>> } >>>> @@ -213,6 +219,9 @@ process_fetch_insn(struct fetch_insn *code, struct pt_regs *regs, void *dest, >>>> case FETCH_OP_IMM: >>>> val = code->immediate; >>>> break; >>>> + case FETCH_OP_COMM: >>>> + val = (unsigned long)current->comm; >>>> + break; >>>> case FETCH_OP_FOFFS: >>>> val = translate_user_vaddr(code->immediate); >>>> break; >>> >>> >> > > as the original commit breaking $comm support was merged for v4.20 (which is a stable kernel) and the wrong behaviour with multiple strings exists in all longterm/stable releases (tested back to v4.4), do you think this should be going into a stable release once it's merged? I added Greg as he might know the answer to that. Thanks, Andreas