All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Matthew Bystrin" <dev.mbstr@gmail.com>
To: "Jiakai Xu" <xujiakai2025@iscas.ac.cn>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>
Cc: "Albert Ou" <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	"Alexandre Ghiti" <alex@ghiti.fr>,
	"Chunyan Zhang" <zhangchunyan@iscas.ac.cn>,
	"Matthew Bystrin" <dev.mbstr@gmail.com>,
	"Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	"Paul Walmsley" <pjw@kernel.org>,
	"Samuel Holland" <samuel.holland@sifive.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: stacktrace: fix stack-out-of-bounds in walk_stackframe
Date: Thu, 14 May 2026 17:21:36 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <DIIGT2B04NER.LLGB7WGGPC2N@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260514100711.838895-1-xujiakai2025@iscas.ac.cn>

Hi, Jiakai!

Thanks for your valid correction!

Jiakai Xu, May 14, 2026 at 13:07:
> -static inline int fp_is_valid(unsigned long fp, unsigned long sp)
> +static inline int fp_is_valid(unsigned long fp, unsigned long sp,
> +			      struct task_struct *task)
>  {
>  	unsigned long low, high;
>  
> +	if (!task)
> +		task = current;
> +

I would suggest to move this `if` into walk_stackframe() function in order to do
this only once before walking loop.

>  	low = sp + sizeof(struct stackframe);
> -	high = ALIGN(sp, THREAD_SIZE);
> +	high = (unsigned long)task_stack_page(task) + THREAD_SIZE;

Also after grepping `task_stack_page` I've noticed that pt_regs structure is
located at the end of stack. Maybe it is a good idea to adjust border even
"lower" to check that sp does not points inside pt_regs? (see task_pt_regs
macro)

>  	return !(fp < low || fp > high || fp & 0x07);
>  }

-- 
Best regards,
Matt

_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Matthew Bystrin" <dev.mbstr@gmail.com>
To: "Jiakai Xu" <xujiakai2025@iscas.ac.cn>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>
Cc: "Albert Ou" <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	"Alexandre Ghiti" <alex@ghiti.fr>,
	"Chunyan Zhang" <zhangchunyan@iscas.ac.cn>,
	"Matthew Bystrin" <dev.mbstr@gmail.com>,
	"Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	"Paul Walmsley" <pjw@kernel.org>,
	"Samuel Holland" <samuel.holland@sifive.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: stacktrace: fix stack-out-of-bounds in walk_stackframe
Date: Thu, 14 May 2026 17:21:36 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <DIIGT2B04NER.LLGB7WGGPC2N@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260514100711.838895-1-xujiakai2025@iscas.ac.cn>

Hi, Jiakai!

Thanks for your valid correction!

Jiakai Xu, May 14, 2026 at 13:07:
> -static inline int fp_is_valid(unsigned long fp, unsigned long sp)
> +static inline int fp_is_valid(unsigned long fp, unsigned long sp,
> +			      struct task_struct *task)
>  {
>  	unsigned long low, high;
>  
> +	if (!task)
> +		task = current;
> +

I would suggest to move this `if` into walk_stackframe() function in order to do
this only once before walking loop.

>  	low = sp + sizeof(struct stackframe);
> -	high = ALIGN(sp, THREAD_SIZE);
> +	high = (unsigned long)task_stack_page(task) + THREAD_SIZE;

Also after grepping `task_stack_page` I've noticed that pt_regs structure is
located at the end of stack. Maybe it is a good idea to adjust border even
"lower" to check that sp does not points inside pt_regs? (see task_pt_regs
macro)

>  	return !(fp < low || fp > high || fp & 0x07);
>  }

-- 
Best regards,
Matt

  reply	other threads:[~2026-05-14 14:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-05-14 10:07 [PATCH] riscv: stacktrace: fix stack-out-of-bounds in walk_stackframe Jiakai Xu
2026-05-14 10:07 ` Jiakai Xu
2026-05-14 14:21 ` Matthew Bystrin [this message]
2026-05-14 14:21   ` Matthew Bystrin
2026-05-15  1:36   ` Jiakai Xu
2026-05-15  1:36     ` Jiakai Xu

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=DIIGT2B04NER.LLGB7WGGPC2N@gmail.com \
    --to=dev.mbstr@gmail.com \
    --cc=alex@ghiti.fr \
    --cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
    --cc=pjw@kernel.org \
    --cc=samuel.holland@sifive.com \
    --cc=xujiakai2025@iscas.ac.cn \
    --cc=zhangchunyan@iscas.ac.cn \
    /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.