From: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>
To: "Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>, "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] x86/kprobes: Fix optprobe optimization check with CONFIG_RETHUNK
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2022 03:31:25 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5BCC1248-FC01-4EB2-BFB2-4BBDD9092045@vmware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <166264929259.775585.14768855667710290362.stgit@devnote2>
> On Sep 8, 2022, at 8:01 AM, Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
>
> Since the CONFIG_RETHUNK and CONFIG_SLS will use INT3 for stopping
> speculative execution after function return, kprobe jump optimization
> always fails on the functions with such INT3 inside the function body.
> (It already checks the INT3 padding between functions, but not inside
> the function)
>
> To avoid this issue, as same as kprobes, check whether the INT3 comes
> from kgdb or not, and if so, stop decoding and make it fail. The other
> INT3 will come from CONFIG_RETHUNK/CONFIG_SLS and those can be
> treated as a one-byte instruction.
>
> Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
> Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Fixes: e463a09af2f0 ("x86: Add straight-line-speculation mitigation")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/opt.c | 28 ++++++++--------------------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/opt.c b/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/opt.c
> index e6b8c5362b94..e57e07b0edb6 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/opt.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/opt.c
> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@
> #include <linux/extable.h>
> #include <linux/kdebug.h>
> #include <linux/kallsyms.h>
> +#include <linux/kgdb.h>
> #include <linux/ftrace.h>
> #include <linux/objtool.h>
> #include <linux/pgtable.h>
> @@ -279,19 +280,6 @@ static int insn_is_indirect_jump(struct insn *insn)
> return ret;
> }
>
> -static bool is_padding_int3(unsigned long addr, unsigned long eaddr)
> -{
> - unsigned char ops;
> -
> - for (; addr < eaddr; addr++) {
> - if (get_kernel_nofault(ops, (void *)addr) < 0 ||
> - ops != INT3_INSN_OPCODE)
> - return false;
> - }
> -
> - return true;
> -}
> -
> /* Decode whole function to ensure any instructions don't jump into target */
> static int can_optimize(unsigned long paddr)
> {
> @@ -334,15 +322,15 @@ static int can_optimize(unsigned long paddr)
> ret = insn_decode_kernel(&insn, (void *)recovered_insn);
> if (ret < 0)
> return 0;
> -
> +#ifdef CONFIG_KGDB
> /*
> - * In the case of detecting unknown breakpoint, this could be
> - * a padding INT3 between functions. Let's check that all the
> - * rest of the bytes are also INT3.
> + * If there is a dynamically installed kgdb sw breakpoint,
> + * this function should not be probed.
> */
> - if (insn.opcode.bytes[0] == INT3_INSN_OPCODE)
> - return is_padding_int3(addr, paddr - offset + size) ? 1 : 0;
> -
> + if (insn.opcode.bytes[0] == INT3_INSN_OPCODE &&
> + kgdb_has_hit_break(addr))
> + return 0;
> +#endif
> /* Recover address */
> insn.kaddr = (void *)addr;
> insn.next_byte = (void *)(addr + insn.length);
Hi Masami,
I encountered a similar issue with can_probe(). I see that your
patches were not upstreamed, at least to 6.1.
So I was wondering whether it they are going to be upstreamed, and
whether you want also to update can_probe().
Thanks,
Nadav
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-15 3:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-08 1:34 [PATCH v2 0/2] x86/kprobes: Fixes for CONFIG_RETHUNK Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2022-09-08 1:34 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/kprobes: Fix kprobes instruction boudary check with CONFIG_RETHUNK Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2022-09-08 5:08 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-09-08 9:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-08 10:04 ` [PATCH] x86,retpoline: Be sure to emit INT3 after JMP *%\reg Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-08 14:01 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-09 8:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-09 14:19 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-09 16:48 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-09-11 15:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-08 10:08 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/kprobes: Fix kprobes instruction boudary check with CONFIG_RETHUNK Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-08 13:03 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2022-09-08 15:01 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] x86/kprobes: Fixes for CONFIG_RETHUNK Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2022-09-08 15:01 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] x86/kprobes: Fix kprobes instruction boudary check with CONFIG_RETHUNK Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2022-09-08 15:01 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] x86/kprobes: Fix optprobe optimization " Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2022-12-15 3:31 ` Nadav Amit [this message]
2022-12-18 14:28 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2022-09-08 19:31 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] x86/kprobes: Fixes for CONFIG_RETHUNK Josh Poimboeuf
2022-09-08 1:34 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] x86/kprobes: Fix optprobe optimization check with CONFIG_RETHUNK Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
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=5BCC1248-FC01-4EB2-BFB2-4BBDD9092045@vmware.com \
--to=namit@vmware.com \
--cc=bp@suse.de \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=suleiman@google.com \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox