From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BFCC1F8670; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 08:02:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1737100958; cv=none; b=RdGDE/zzMCGn1WpfJrhHeyAaIw1moho+/8Leyj7apMuW44SugS2isvyJ7QmzIQW0Bm9bXSR1tQqlEds9qWTBIUWZXbMGciKooGDuNiQ5WeVUqIyilSVJxXhZacm2bfw3EoqwDEbcoBAfFRJdSsBqHxDeO4Rybw7QsUpTIWgXjk8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1737100958; c=relaxed/simple; bh=aPT8laPvdO1MFb5MDe4rtjsTWRGWV6Y+cK6r0wH3r20=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=lQTd3IYB2cR/PBlaiF31raG//h7JnFXo3M8D61CZpAYdrOCDushato6U0N5uTLds3zjfwGYfGS3qaeRXOmQSC6StsEMfcqE2QTSIQQq2feof7GLDmFf36lkVC3hXOAnwwkj67lYp+EGjFnvSH+8Ps7zFLpoYLv73d+5qe3cdTrw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=alw3DPVp; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="alw3DPVp" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 27B8AC4CEDD; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 08:02:31 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1737100957; bh=aPT8laPvdO1MFb5MDe4rtjsTWRGWV6Y+cK6r0wH3r20=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=alw3DPVpkmqKCLEXlKtnb4/zzX5jnDOON8U5Xba/hlhc9f/Uc/U2sxrZ+8hySDkn+ mC9keN0/rVlHz/o8xdLU/tq4nVpWBzN9JZzWr+wF5cch7m2ksxnw4wQ/oyjBOgz840 kryONvArc770EGxwgyIps+hPGVnwytTkJfFbvv+BYDKLq03c7Mfhor+qDSkUSCPkNE akXH/Fletgzux0bwgPYs8BBvRPQQ0oQwF898TnDXyEziQtgOx1efQtk9Php4rtJ6Qq 9Im7KRI/ewyBPy8h2qxEKsX767+9xWnyl07hcfOMDRqQeBFW2fnOl+FYQCfGXJ25Vc URDiJeGNgCy3w== Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 17:02:29 +0900 From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) To: Oleg Nesterov Cc: Eyal Birger , kees@kernel.org, luto@amacapital.net, wad@chromium.org, mhiramat@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, jolsa@kernel.org, alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com, olsajiri@gmail.com, cyphar@cyphar.com, songliubraving@fb.com, yhs@fb.com, john.fastabend@gmail.com, peterz@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de, bp@alien8.de, daniel@iogearbox.net, ast@kernel.org, andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, rafi@rbk.io, shmulik.ladkani@gmail.com, bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] seccomp: passthrough uretprobe systemcall without filtering Message-Id: <20250117170229.f1e1a9f03a8547d31cd875db@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20250117013927.GB2610@redhat.com> References: <20250117005539.325887-1-eyal.birger@gmail.com> <20250117013927.GB2610@redhat.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.8.0beta1 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-api@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 02:39:28 +0100 Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 01/16, Eyal Birger wrote: > > > > Fixes: ff474a78cef5 ("uprobe: Add uretprobe syscall to speed up return probe") > > Reported-by: Rafael Buchbinder > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHsH6Gs3Eh8DFU0wq58c_LF8A4_+o6z456J7BidmcVY2AqOnHQ@mail.gmail.com/ > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > ... > > @@ -1359,6 +1359,11 @@ int __secure_computing(const struct seccomp_data *sd) > > this_syscall = sd ? sd->nr : > > syscall_get_nr(current, current_pt_regs()); > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64 > > + if (unlikely(this_syscall == __NR_uretprobe) && !in_ia32_syscall()) > > + return 0; > > +#endif > > Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov > > > A note for the seccomp maintainers... > > I don't know what do you think, but I agree in advance that the very fact this > patch adds "#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64" into __secure_computing() doesn't look nice. > Indeed. in_ia32_syscall() depends arch/x86 too. We can add an inline function like; ``` uprobes.h static inline bool is_uprobe_syscall(int syscall) { // arch_is_uprobe_syscall check can be replaced by Kconfig, // something like CONFIG_ARCH_URETPROBE_SYSCALL. #ifdef arch_is_uprobe_syscall return arch_is_uprobe_syscall(syscall) #else return false; #endif } ``` and ``` arch/x86/include/asm/uprobes.h #define arch_is_uprobe_syscall(syscall) \ (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_64) && syscall == __NR_uretprobe && !in_ia32_syscall()) ``` > The problem is that we need a simple patch for -stable which fixes the real > problem. We can cleanup this logic later, I think. Hmm, at least we should make it is_uprobe_syscall() in uprobes.h so that do not pollute the seccomp subsystem with #ifdef. Thank you, > > Oleg. > -- Masami Hiramatsu (Google)