From: Abhishek Sagar <sagar.abhishek@gmail.com>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
qbarnes@gmail.com, ananth@in.ibm.com, jkenisto@us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: kprobes change kprobe_handler flow
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 23:42:37 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <477D2595.4060102@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <477C08A0.503@redhat.com>
Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>>> As a result, this function just setups re-entrance.
>> As you've also pointed out in your previous reply, this case is
>> peculiar and therefore I believe it should be marked as a BUG(). I've
>> left the original case, if (kcb->kprobe_status==KPROBE_HIT_SS) &&
>> (*p->ainsn.insn == BREAKPOINT_INSTRUCTION), untouched and is handled
>> as it was before. However, if (kcb->kprobe_status==KPROBE_HIT_SS) &&
>> !(*p->ainsn.insn == BREAKPOINT_INSTRUCTION), then instead of
>> incrementing nmissed count like before, it should cry out a BUG. This
>> is not an ordinary recursive probe handling case which should update
>> the nmissed count.
>
> Hmm, I can not agree, because it is possible to insert a kprobe
> into kprobe's instruction buffer. If it should be a bug, we must
> check it when registering the kprobe.
> (And also, in *p->ainsn.insn == BREAKPOINT_INSTRUCTION case, I doubt
> that the kernel can handle this "orphaned" breakpoint, because the
> breakpoint address has been changed.)
>
> Anyway, if you would like to change the logic, please separate it from
> cleanup patch.
Okay. For now, I've restored the original behavior.
>>>> -out:
>>>> + if (!ret)
>>>> + preempt_enable_no_resched();
>>> I think this is a bit ugly...
>>> Why would you avoid using mutiple "return"s in this function?
>>> I think you can remove "ret" from this function.
>> Hmm...there the are no deeply nested if-elses nor overlapping paths
>> which need to be avoided. All the nested checks unroll cleanly too.
>
> Oh, I just mentioned about this "if (!ret)" condition.
> Could you try to remove this "ret" variable?
> I think some "ret=1" could be replaced by "return 1" easily.
Done. You should find the desired changed in this patch.
Signed-off-by: Abhishek Sagar <sagar.abhishek@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Quentin Barnes <qbarnes@gmail.com>
---
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes.c b/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes.c
index a72e02b..06f8d08 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes.c
@@ -441,6 +441,34 @@ void __kprobes arch_prepare_kretprobe(struct kretprobe_instance *ri,
/* Replace the return addr with trampoline addr */
*sara = (unsigned long) &kretprobe_trampoline;
}
+
+static void __kprobes recursive_singlestep(struct kprobe *p,
+ struct pt_regs *regs,
+ struct kprobe_ctlblk *kcb)
+{
+ save_previous_kprobe(kcb);
+ set_current_kprobe(p, regs, kcb);
+ kprobes_inc_nmissed_count(p);
+ prepare_singlestep(p, regs);
+ kcb->kprobe_status = KPROBE_REENTER;
+}
+
+static void __kprobes setup_singlestep(struct kprobe *p, struct pt_regs *regs,
+ struct kprobe_ctlblk *kcb)
+{
+#if !defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT) || defined(CONFIG_PM)
+ if (p->ainsn.boostable == 1 && !p->post_handler) {
+ /* Boost up -- we can execute copied instructions directly */
+ reset_current_kprobe();
+ regs->ip = (unsigned long)p->ainsn.insn;
+ preempt_enable_no_resched();
+ return;
+ }
+#endif
+ prepare_singlestep(p, regs);
+ kcb->kprobe_status = KPROBE_HIT_SS;
+}
+
/*
* We have reentered the kprobe_handler(), since another probe was hit while
* within the handler. We save the original kprobes variables and just single
@@ -449,13 +477,9 @@ void __kprobes arch_prepare_kretprobe(struct kretprobe_instance *ri,
static int __kprobes reenter_kprobe(struct kprobe *p, struct pt_regs *regs,
struct kprobe_ctlblk *kcb)
{
- if (kcb->kprobe_status == KPROBE_HIT_SS &&
- *p->ainsn.insn == BREAKPOINT_INSTRUCTION) {
- regs->flags &= ~X86_EFLAGS_TF;
- regs->flags |= kcb->kprobe_saved_flags;
- return 0;
+ switch (kcb->kprobe_status) {
+ case KPROBE_HIT_SSDONE:
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
- } else if (kcb->kprobe_status == KPROBE_HIT_SSDONE) {
/* TODO: Provide re-entrancy from post_kprobes_handler() and
* avoid exception stack corruption while single-stepping on
* the instruction of the new probe.
@@ -463,14 +487,26 @@ static int __kprobes reenter_kprobe(struct kprobe *p, struct pt_regs *regs,
arch_disarm_kprobe(p);
regs->ip = (unsigned long)p->addr;
reset_current_kprobe();
- return 1;
+ preempt_enable_no_resched();
+ break;
#endif
+ case KPROBE_HIT_ACTIVE:
+ recursive_singlestep(p, regs, kcb);
+ break;
+ case KPROBE_HIT_SS:
+ if (*p->ainsn.insn == BREAKPOINT_INSTRUCTION) {
+ regs->flags &= ~TF_MASK;
+ regs->flags |= kcb->kprobe_saved_flags;
+ return 0;
+ } else {
+ recursive_singlestep(p, regs, kcb);
+ }
+ break;
+ default:
+ /* impossible cases */
+ WARN_ON(1);
}
- save_previous_kprobe(kcb);
- set_current_kprobe(p, regs, kcb);
- kprobes_inc_nmissed_count(p);
- prepare_singlestep(p, regs);
- kcb->kprobe_status = KPROBE_REENTER;
+
return 1;
}
@@ -480,83 +516,66 @@ static int __kprobes reenter_kprobe(struct kprobe *p, struct pt_regs *regs,
*/
static int __kprobes kprobe_handler(struct pt_regs *regs)
{
- struct kprobe *p;
- int ret = 0;
kprobe_opcode_t *addr;
+ struct kprobe *p;
struct kprobe_ctlblk *kcb;
addr = (kprobe_opcode_t *)(regs->ip - sizeof(kprobe_opcode_t));
+ if (*addr != BREAKPOINT_INSTRUCTION) {
+ /*
+ * The breakpoint instruction was removed right
+ * after we hit it. Another cpu has removed
+ * either a probepoint or a debugger breakpoint
+ * at this address. In either case, no further
+ * handling of this interrupt is appropriate.
+ * Back up over the (now missing) int3 and run
+ * the original instruction.
+ */
+ regs->ip = (unsigned long)addr;
+ return 1;
+ }
/*
* We don't want to be preempted for the entire
- * duration of kprobe processing
+ * duration of kprobe processing. We conditionally
+ * re-enable preemption at the end of this function,
+ * and also in reenter_kprobe() and setup_singlestep().
*/
preempt_disable();
- kcb = get_kprobe_ctlblk();
+ kcb = get_kprobe_ctlblk();
p = get_kprobe(addr);
+
if (p) {
- /* Check we're not actually recursing */
if (kprobe_running()) {
- ret = reenter_kprobe(p, regs, kcb);
- if (kcb->kprobe_status == KPROBE_REENTER)
- {
- ret = 1;
- goto out;
- }
- goto preempt_out;
+ if (reenter_kprobe(p, regs, kcb))
+ return 1;
} else {
set_current_kprobe(p, regs, kcb);
kcb->kprobe_status = KPROBE_HIT_ACTIVE;
- if (p->pre_handler && p->pre_handler(p, regs))
- {
- /* handler set things up, skip ss setup */
- ret = 1;
- goto out;
- }
- }
- } else {
- if (*addr != BREAKPOINT_INSTRUCTION) {
+
/*
- * The breakpoint instruction was removed right
- * after we hit it. Another cpu has removed
- * either a probepoint or a debugger breakpoint
- * at this address. In either case, no further
- * handling of this interrupt is appropriate.
- * Back up over the (now missing) int3 and run
- * the original instruction.
+ * If we have no pre-handler or it returned 0, we
+ * continue with normal processing. If we have a
+ * pre-handler and it returned non-zero, it prepped
+ * for calling the break_handler below on re-entry
+ * for jprobe processing, so get out doing nothing
+ * more here.
*/
- regs->ip = (unsigned long)addr;
- ret = 1;
- goto preempt_out;
+ if (!p->pre_handler || !p->pre_handler(p, regs))
+ setup_singlestep(p, regs, kcb);
+ return 1;
}
- if (kprobe_running()) {
- p = __get_cpu_var(current_kprobe);
- if (p->break_handler && p->break_handler(p, regs))
- goto ss_probe;
+ } else if (kprobe_running()) {
+ p = __get_cpu_var(current_kprobe);
+ if (p->break_handler && p->break_handler(p, regs)) {
+ setup_singlestep(p, regs, kcb);
+ return 1;
}
- /* Not one of ours: let kernel handle it */
- goto preempt_out;
- }
+ } /* else: not a kprobe fault; let the kernel handle it */
-ss_probe:
- ret = 1;
-#if !defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT) || defined(CONFIG_PM)
- if (p->ainsn.boostable == 1 && !p->post_handler) {
- /* Boost up -- we can execute copied instructions directly */
- reset_current_kprobe();
- regs->ip = (unsigned long)p->ainsn.insn;
- goto preempt_out;
- }
-#endif
- prepare_singlestep(p, regs);
- kcb->kprobe_status = KPROBE_HIT_SS;
- goto out;
-
-preempt_out:
preempt_enable_no_resched();
-out:
- return ret;
+ return 0;
}
/*
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-03 18:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-28 1:44 [PATCH] x86: kprobes change kprobe_handler flow Harvey Harrison
2007-12-31 13:03 ` Abhishek Sagar
2008-01-01 15:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-01 19:40 ` Abhishek Sagar
2008-01-01 20:19 ` Harvey Harrison
2008-01-01 20:54 ` Abhishek Sagar
2008-01-02 18:09 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-01-02 19:31 ` Abhishek Sagar
2008-01-02 20:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-02 21:56 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-01-03 17:15 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-01-03 21:31 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-01-04 6:34 ` Abhishek Sagar
2008-01-03 18:12 ` Abhishek Sagar [this message]
2008-01-03 20:11 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-01-04 6:43 ` Abhishek Sagar
2008-01-01 17:49 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-01-01 20:24 ` Abhishek Sagar
2008-01-02 16:00 ` Masami Hiramatsu
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-12-28 2:08 Harvey Harrison
2007-12-30 8:07 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2007-12-30 13:47 ` Ingo Molnar
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=477D2595.4060102@gmail.com \
--to=sagar.abhishek@gmail.com \
--cc=ananth@in.ibm.com \
--cc=harvey.harrison@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jkenisto@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhiramat@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=qbarnes@gmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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.