From: "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@altlinux.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Elvira Khabirova <lineprinter@altlinux.org>,
Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@redhat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
strace-devel@lists.strace.io
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] ptrace: save the type of syscall-stop in ptrace_message
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2018 13:34:36 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181129103436.GA11547@altlinux.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrVjMorQDsJzQGaREEB5_7B24ApWSoNQfRd3K3QNSGAyEA@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3930 bytes --]
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 03:17:49PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 2:11 PM Dmitry V. Levin <ldv@altlinux.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 06:23:46PM +0300, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 03:20:06PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > > On 11/28, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 02:49:14PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > > > > On 11/28, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > +/*
> > > > > > > + * These values are stored in task->ptrace_message by tracehook_report_syscall_*
> > > > > > > + * to describe current syscall-stop.
> > > > > > > + *
> > > > > > > + * Values for these constants are chosen so that they do not appear
> > > > > > > + * in task->ptrace_message by other means.
> > > > > > > + */
> > > > > > > +#define PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_ENTRY 0x80000000U
> > > > > > > +#define PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_EXIT 0x90000000U
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Again, I do not really understand the comment... Why should we care about
> > > > > > "do not appear in task->ptrace_message by other means" ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2/2 should detect ptrace_report_syscall() case correctly, so we can use any
> > > > > > numbers, say, 1 and 2?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If debugger does PTRACE_GETEVENTMSG it should know how to interpet the value
> > > > > > anyway after wait(status).
> > > > >
> > > > > Given that without this patch the value returned by PTRACE_GETEVENTMSG
> > > > > during syscall stop is undefined, we need two different ptrace_message
> > > > > values that cannot be set by other ptrace events to enable reliable
> > > > > identification of syscall-enter-stop and syscall-exit-stop in userspace:
> > > > > if we make PTRACE_GETEVENTMSG return 0 or any other value routinely set by
> > > > > other ptrace events, it would be hard for userspace to find out whether
> > > > > the kernel implements new semantics or not.
> > > >
> > > > Hmm, why? Debugger can just do ptrace(PTRACE_GET_SYSCALL_INFO, NULL), if it
> > > > returns EIO then it is not implemented?
> > >
> > > The debugger that uses PTRACE_GET_SYSCALL_INFO does not need to call
> > > PTRACE_GETEVENTMSG for syscall stops.
> > > My concern here is the PTRACE_GETEVENTMSG interface itself. If we use
> > > ptrace_message to implement PTRACE_GET_SYSCALL_INFO and expose
> > > PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_{ENTRY,EXIT} for regular PTRACE_GETEVENTMSG users,
> > > it should have clear semantics.
> >
> > Since our implementation of PTRACE_GET_SYSCALL_INFO uses ptrace_message
> > to distinguish syscall-enter-stop from syscall-exit-stop, we could choose
> > one of the following approaches:
> >
> > 1. Do not document the values saved into ptrace_message during syscall
> > stops (and exposed via PTRACE_GETEVENTMSG) as a part of ptrace API,
> > leaving the value returned by PTRACE_GETEVENTMSG during syscall stops
> > as undefined.
> >
> > 2. Document these values chosen to avoid collisions with ptrace_message values
> > set by other ptrace events so that PTRACE_GETEVENTMSG users can easily tell
> > whether this new semantics is supported by the kernel or not.
>
> I don't like any of this at all. Can we please choose a sensible API
> design and let the API drive the implementation instead of vice versa?
What are your concerns? Do you see something wrong in exposing this
information via PTRACE_GETEVENTMSG?
Anyway, can we agree on the PTRACE_GET_SYSCALL_INFO API, please?
> ISTM the correct solution is to add some new state to task_struct for
> this.
>
> If we're concerned about making task_struct bigger, I have a
> half-finished patch to factor all the ptrace tracee state into a
> separate struct.
This is refactoring of the kernel - a thing userspace people are not
the best equipped to do. This part should rather be sorted out by kernel
people.
--
ldv
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-29 10:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-28 13:04 [PATCH v4 0/2] ptrace: add PTRACE_GET_SYSCALL_INFO request Dmitry V. Levin
[not found] ` <20181128130439.GB28206-u2l5PoMzF/Vg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
2018-11-28 13:06 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] ptrace: save the type of syscall-stop in ptrace_message Dmitry V. Levin
2018-11-28 13:49 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-11-28 14:05 ` Dmitry V. Levin
2018-11-28 14:20 ` Oleg Nesterov
[not found] ` <20181128142006.GE30395-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2018-11-28 15:23 ` Dmitry V. Levin
[not found] ` <20181128152346.GG28206-u2l5PoMzF/Vg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
2018-11-28 22:11 ` Dmitry V. Levin
2018-11-28 23:17 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-11-29 10:34 ` Dmitry V. Levin [this message]
2018-11-29 15:03 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-11-29 14:47 ` Oleg Nesterov
[not found] ` <20181129144742.GB10645-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2018-11-29 21:10 ` Dmitry V. Levin
2018-11-30 11:29 ` Oleg Nesterov
[not found] ` <20181130112920.GD23670-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2018-11-30 22:53 ` Dmitry V. Levin
2018-11-28 13:07 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] ptrace: add PTRACE_GET_SYSCALL_INFO request Dmitry V. Levin
2018-11-28 14:10 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-11-28 14:29 ` 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=20181129103436.GA11547@altlinux.org \
--to=ldv@altlinux.org \
--cc=esyr@redhat.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=lineprinter@altlinux.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=strace-devel@lists.strace.io \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).