From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Anil S Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: [PATCH -tip 1/3] x86/kprobes: Retrieve correct opcode for group instruction
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2021 00:25:24 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <161469872400.49483.18214724458034233166.stgit@devnote2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <161469871251.49483.9142858308048988638.stgit@devnote2>
Since the opcodes start from 0xff are group5 instruction group which is
not 2 bytes opcode but the extended opcode determined by the MOD/RM byte.
The commit abd82e533d88 ("x86/kprobes: Do not decode opcode in resume_execution()")
used insn->opcode.bytes[1], but that is not correct. We have to refer
the insn->modrm.bytes[1] instead.
Fixes: abd82e533d88 ("x86/kprobes: Do not decode opcode in resume_execution()")
Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
---
arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c | 6 +++++-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c b/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c
index df776cdca327..08674e7a5d7b 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c
@@ -448,7 +448,11 @@ static void set_resume_flags(struct kprobe *p, struct insn *insn)
break;
#endif
case 0xff:
- opcode = insn->opcode.bytes[1];
+ /*
+ * Since the 0xff is an extended group opcode, the instruction
+ * is determined by the MOD/RM byte.
+ */
+ opcode = insn->modrm.bytes[0];
if ((opcode & 0x30) == 0x10) {
/*
* call absolute, indirect
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-02 18:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-23 23:24 Why do kprobes and uprobes singlestep? Andy Lutomirski
2021-02-24 1:17 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2021-02-24 19:45 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-02-25 2:22 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2021-02-25 6:03 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-02-25 9:11 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2021-03-01 14:08 ` [RFC PATCH 0/1] x86/kprobes: Remoev single-step trap from x86 kprobes Masami Hiramatsu
2021-03-01 14:08 ` [RFC PATCH 1/1] x86/kprobes: Use int3 instead of debug trap for single-step Masami Hiramatsu
2021-03-02 8:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-03-02 8:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-03-02 8:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-03-02 8:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-03-02 12:51 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2021-03-02 13:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-03-02 15:25 ` [PATCH -tip 0/3] x86/kprobes: Remoev single-step trap from x86 kprobes Masami Hiramatsu
2021-03-02 15:25 ` Masami Hiramatsu [this message]
2021-03-23 15:15 ` [tip: x86/core] x86/kprobes: Retrieve correct opcode for group instruction tip-bot2 for Masami Hiramatsu
2021-03-02 15:25 ` [PATCH -tip 2/3] x86/kprobes: Identify far indirect JMP correctly Masami Hiramatsu
2021-03-23 15:15 ` [tip: x86/core] " tip-bot2 for Masami Hiramatsu
2021-03-02 15:25 ` [PATCH -tip 3/3] x86/kprobes: Use int3 instead of debug trap for single-step Masami Hiramatsu
2021-03-23 15:15 ` [tip: x86/core] " tip-bot2 for Masami Hiramatsu
2021-03-17 14:55 ` [PATCH -tip 0/3] x86/kprobes: Remoev single-step trap from x86 kprobes Masami Hiramatsu
2021-03-17 16:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-03-17 17:45 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-02-25 9:59 ` Why do kprobes and uprobes singlestep? Peter Zijlstra
2021-03-01 16:51 ` Oleg Nesterov
2021-03-02 1:36 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-03-02 20:24 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-03-02 21:02 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-03-03 1:22 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-03-03 1:46 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-03-03 2:18 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-03-03 13:27 ` Oleg Nesterov
2021-03-03 18:11 ` Daniel Xu
2021-03-03 19:14 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-03-02 20:25 ` Oleg Nesterov
2021-03-02 20:35 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-03-02 20:28 ` Oleg Nesterov
2021-03-02 2:22 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2021-03-02 2:48 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-03-02 20:31 ` Oleg Nesterov
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=161469872400.49483.18214724458034233166.stgit@devnote2 \
--to=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=anil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=x86@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 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.