stable.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* FAILED: patch "[PATCH] uprobes/x86: Fix detection of 32-bit user mode" failed to apply to 4.14-stable tree
@ 2019-09-02 20:24 gregkh
  2019-09-03  2:53 ` Sasha Levin
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: gregkh @ 2019-09-02 20:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: me, dsafonov, mhiramat, oleg, srikar, tglx; +Cc: stable


The patch below does not apply to the 4.14-stable tree.
If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
id to <stable@vger.kernel.org>.

thanks,

greg k-h

------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------

From 9212ec7d8357ea630031e89d0d399c761421c83b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sebastian Mayr <me@sam.st>
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2019 17:26:17 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] uprobes/x86: Fix detection of 32-bit user mode

32-bit processes running on a 64-bit kernel are not always detected
correctly, causing the process to crash when uretprobes are installed.

The reason for the crash is that in_ia32_syscall() is used to determine the
process's mode, which only works correctly when called from a syscall.

In the case of uretprobes, however, the function is called from a exception
and always returns 'false' on a 64-bit kernel. In consequence this leads to
corruption of the process's return address.

Fix this by using user_64bit_mode() instead of in_ia32_syscall(), which
is correct in any situation.

[ tglx: Add a comment and the following historical info ]

This should have been detected by the rename which happened in commit

  abfb9498ee13 ("x86/entry: Rename is_{ia32,x32}_task() to in_{ia32,x32}_syscall()")

which states in the changelog:

    The is_ia32_task()/is_x32_task() function names are a big misnomer: they
    suggests that the compat-ness of a system call is a task property, which
    is not true, the compatness of a system call purely depends on how it
    was invoked through the system call layer.
    .....

and then it went and blindly renamed every call site.

Sadly enough this was already mentioned here:

   8faaed1b9f50 ("uprobes/x86: Introduce sizeof_long(), cleanup adjust_ret_addr() and
arch_uretprobe_hijack_return_addr()")

where the changelog says:

    TODO: is_ia32_task() is not what we actually want, TS_COMPAT does
    not necessarily mean 32bit. Fortunately syscall-like insns can't be
    probed so it actually works, but it would be better to rename and
    use is_ia32_frame().

and goes all the way back to:

    0326f5a94dde ("uprobes/core: Handle breakpoint and singlestep exceptions")

Oh well. 7+ years until someone actually tried a uretprobe on a 32bit
process on a 64bit kernel....

Fixes: 0326f5a94dde ("uprobes/core: Handle breakpoint and singlestep exceptions")
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Mayr <me@sam.st>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Cc: Dmitry Safonov <dsafonov@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190728152617.7308-1-me@sam.st

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c b/arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c
index d8359ebeea70..8cd745ef8c7b 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c
@@ -508,9 +508,12 @@ struct uprobe_xol_ops {
 	void	(*abort)(struct arch_uprobe *, struct pt_regs *);
 };
 
-static inline int sizeof_long(void)
+static inline int sizeof_long(struct pt_regs *regs)
 {
-	return in_ia32_syscall() ? 4 : 8;
+	/*
+	 * Check registers for mode as in_xxx_syscall() does not apply here.
+	 */
+	return user_64bit_mode(regs) ? 8 : 4;
 }
 
 static int default_pre_xol_op(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct pt_regs *regs)
@@ -521,9 +524,9 @@ static int default_pre_xol_op(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct pt_regs *regs)
 
 static int emulate_push_stack(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long val)
 {
-	unsigned long new_sp = regs->sp - sizeof_long();
+	unsigned long new_sp = regs->sp - sizeof_long(regs);
 
-	if (copy_to_user((void __user *)new_sp, &val, sizeof_long()))
+	if (copy_to_user((void __user *)new_sp, &val, sizeof_long(regs)))
 		return -EFAULT;
 
 	regs->sp = new_sp;
@@ -556,7 +559,7 @@ static int default_post_xol_op(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct pt_regs *regs
 		long correction = utask->vaddr - utask->xol_vaddr;
 		regs->ip += correction;
 	} else if (auprobe->defparam.fixups & UPROBE_FIX_CALL) {
-		regs->sp += sizeof_long(); /* Pop incorrect return address */
+		regs->sp += sizeof_long(regs); /* Pop incorrect return address */
 		if (emulate_push_stack(regs, utask->vaddr + auprobe->defparam.ilen))
 			return -ERESTART;
 	}
@@ -675,7 +678,7 @@ static int branch_post_xol_op(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct pt_regs *regs)
 	 * "call" insn was executed out-of-line. Just restore ->sp and restart.
 	 * We could also restore ->ip and try to call branch_emulate_op() again.
 	 */
-	regs->sp += sizeof_long();
+	regs->sp += sizeof_long(regs);
 	return -ERESTART;
 }
 
@@ -1056,7 +1059,7 @@ bool arch_uprobe_skip_sstep(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct pt_regs *regs)
 unsigned long
 arch_uretprobe_hijack_return_addr(unsigned long trampoline_vaddr, struct pt_regs *regs)
 {
-	int rasize = sizeof_long(), nleft;
+	int rasize = sizeof_long(regs), nleft;
 	unsigned long orig_ret_vaddr = 0; /* clear high bits for 32-bit apps */
 
 	if (copy_from_user(&orig_ret_vaddr, (void __user *)regs->sp, rasize))


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: FAILED: patch "[PATCH] uprobes/x86: Fix detection of 32-bit user mode" failed to apply to 4.14-stable tree
  2019-09-02 20:24 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] uprobes/x86: Fix detection of 32-bit user mode" failed to apply to 4.14-stable tree gregkh
@ 2019-09-03  2:53 ` Sasha Levin
  2019-09-03  6:23   ` Greg KH
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Sasha Levin @ 2019-09-03  2:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gregkh; +Cc: me, dsafonov, mhiramat, oleg, srikar, tglx, stable

On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 10:24:29PM +0200, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
>
>The patch below does not apply to the 4.14-stable tree.
>If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
>tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
>id to <stable@vger.kernel.org>.

I've backported this for 4.14, 4.9, and 4.4:

 - On 4.14 and 4.9 worked around missing e7ed9d9bd0375 ("uprobes/x86:
   Emulate push insns for uprobe on x86").
 - On 4.4 worked around missing abfb9498ee132 ("x86/entry: Rename
   is_{ia32,x32}_task() to in_{ia32,x32}_syscall()").

--
Thanks,
Sasha

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: FAILED: patch "[PATCH] uprobes/x86: Fix detection of 32-bit user mode" failed to apply to 4.14-stable tree
  2019-09-03  2:53 ` Sasha Levin
@ 2019-09-03  6:23   ` Greg KH
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2019-09-03  6:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sasha Levin; +Cc: me, dsafonov, mhiramat, oleg, srikar, tglx, stable

On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 10:53:47PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 10:24:29PM +0200, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> > 
> > The patch below does not apply to the 4.14-stable tree.
> > If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
> > tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
> > id to <stable@vger.kernel.org>.
> 
> I've backported this for 4.14, 4.9, and 4.4:
> 
> - On 4.14 and 4.9 worked around missing e7ed9d9bd0375 ("uprobes/x86:
>   Emulate push insns for uprobe on x86").
> - On 4.4 worked around missing abfb9498ee132 ("x86/entry: Rename
>   is_{ia32,x32}_task() to in_{ia32,x32}_syscall()").

Thanks for doing this.

greg k-h

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2019-09-03  6:23 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-09-02 20:24 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] uprobes/x86: Fix detection of 32-bit user mode" failed to apply to 4.14-stable tree gregkh
2019-09-03  2:53 ` Sasha Levin
2019-09-03  6:23   ` Greg KH

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).