linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v7 2/6] arm64: ptrace: allow tracer to skip a system call
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 15:23:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141008142328.GR26140@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1412243176-16192-3-git-send-email-takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>

On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 10:46:12AM +0100, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> If tracer specifies -1 as a syscall number, this traced system call should
> be skipped with a value in x0 used as a return value.
> This patch implements this semantics, but there is one restriction here:
> 
>    when syscall(-1) is issued by user, tracer cannot skip this system call
>    and modify a return value at syscall entry.
> 
> In order to ease this flavor, we need to take whatever value x0 has as
> a return value, but this might result in a bogus value being returned,
> especially when tracer doesn't do anything against this syscall.
> So we always return ENOSYS instead, while we still have another chance to
> change a return value at syscall exit.
> 
> Please also note:
> * syscall entry tracing and syscall exit tracing (ftrace tracepoint and
>   audit) are always executed, if enabled, even when skipping a system call
>   (that is, -1).
>   In this way, we can avoid a potential bug where audit_syscall_entry()
>   might be called without audit_syscall_exit() at the previous system call
>   being called, that would cause OOPs in audit_syscall_entry().
> 
> * syscallno may also be set to -1 if a fatal signal (SIGKILL) is detected
>   in tracehook_report_syscall_entry(), but since a value set to x0 (ENOSYS)
>   is not used in this case, we may neglect the case.
> 
> Signed-off-by: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h |    8 ++++++++
>  arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S       |    4 ++++
>  arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c      |   23 ++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h
> index 41ed9e1..736ebc3 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h
> @@ -65,6 +65,14 @@
>  #define COMPAT_PT_TEXT_ADDR		0x10000
>  #define COMPAT_PT_DATA_ADDR		0x10004
>  #define COMPAT_PT_TEXT_END_ADDR		0x10008
> +
> +/*
> + * System call will be skipped if a syscall number is changed to -1
> + * with ptrace(PTRACE_SET_SYSCALL).
> + * Upper 32-bit should be ignored for safe check.
> + */
> +#define IS_SKIP_SYSCALL(no)	((int)(no & 0xffffffff) == -1)

I don't think this macro is very useful, especially considering that we
already use ~0UL explicitly in other places. Just move the comment into
syscall_trace_enter and be done with it. I also don't think you need the
mask (the cast is enough).

> +
>  #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>  
>  /* sizeof(struct user) for AArch32 */
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S
> index f0b5e51..b53a1c5 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S
> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
>  #include <asm/asm-offsets.h>
>  #include <asm/errno.h>
>  #include <asm/esr.h>
> +#include <asm/ptrace.h>
>  #include <asm/thread_info.h>
>  #include <asm/unistd.h>
>  
> @@ -671,6 +672,8 @@ ENDPROC(el0_svc)
>  __sys_trace:
>  	mov	x0, sp
>  	bl	syscall_trace_enter
> +	cmp	w0, #-1				// skip the syscall?
> +	b.eq	__sys_trace_return_skipped
>  	adr	lr, __sys_trace_return		// return address
>  	uxtw	scno, w0			// syscall number (possibly new)
>  	mov	x1, sp				// pointer to regs
> @@ -685,6 +688,7 @@ __sys_trace:
>  
>  __sys_trace_return:
>  	str	x0, [sp]			// save returned x0
> +__sys_trace_return_skipped:
>  	mov	x0, sp
>  	bl	syscall_trace_exit
>  	b	ret_to_user
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c
> index 2842f9f..6b11c6a 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c
> @@ -1126,6 +1126,8 @@ static void tracehook_report_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs,
>  
>  asmlinkage int syscall_trace_enter(struct pt_regs *regs)
>  {
> +	unsigned int orig_syscallno = regs->syscallno;
> +
>  	if (test_thread_flag(TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE))
>  		tracehook_report_syscall(regs, PTRACE_SYSCALL_ENTER);
>  
> @@ -1133,7 +1135,26 @@ asmlinkage int syscall_trace_enter(struct pt_regs *regs)
>  		trace_sys_enter(regs, regs->syscallno);
>  
>  	audit_syscall_entry(syscall_get_arch(), regs->syscallno,
> -		regs->orig_x0, regs->regs[1], regs->regs[2], regs->regs[3]);
> +			regs->orig_x0, regs->regs[1],
> +			regs->regs[2], regs->regs[3]);
> +
> +	if (IS_SKIP_SYSCALL(regs->syscallno) &&
> +			IS_SKIP_SYSCALL(orig_syscallno)) {
> +		/*
> +		 * For compatibility, we handles user-issued syscall(-1).

Compatibility with what? arch/arm/?

> +		 *
> +		 * RESTRICTION: we can't modify a return value here in this
> +		 * specific case. In order to ease this flavor, we have to
> +		 * take whatever value x0 has as a return value, but this
> +		 * might result in a bogus value being returned.

This comment isn't helping me. Are we returning a bogus value or not? If so,
why is that acceptable?

> +		 * NOTE: syscallno may also be set to -1 if fatal signal
> +		 * is detected in tracehook_report_syscall(ENTRY),
> +		 * but since a value set to x0 here is not used in this
> +		 * case, we may neglect the case.
> +		 */

I think can you remove thise NOTE, it's not very informative.

Will

  reply	other threads:[~2014-10-08 14:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-10-02  9:46 [PATCH v7 0/6] arm64: add seccomp support AKASHI Takahiro
2014-10-02  9:46 ` [PATCH v7 1/6] arm64: ptrace: add PTRACE_SET_SYSCALL AKASHI Takahiro
2014-10-08 14:13   ` Will Deacon
2014-10-08 15:30     ` Kees Cook
2014-10-09  1:55       ` AKASHI Takahiro
2014-10-09  9:23       ` Will Deacon
2014-11-06  2:40         ` AKASHI Takahiro
2014-11-06 18:17           ` Kees Cook
2014-10-02  9:46 ` [PATCH v7 2/6] arm64: ptrace: allow tracer to skip a system call AKASHI Takahiro
2014-10-08 14:23   ` Will Deacon [this message]
2014-10-09  4:29     ` AKASHI Takahiro
2014-10-10 11:05       ` Will Deacon
2014-10-02  9:46 ` [PATCH v7 3/6] asm-generic: add generic seccomp.h for secure computing mode 1 AKASHI Takahiro
2014-10-02  9:46 ` [PATCH v7 4/6] arm64: add seccomp syscall for compat task AKASHI Takahiro
2014-10-02  9:46 ` [PATCH v7 5/6] arm64: add SIGSYS siginfo " AKASHI Takahiro
2014-10-08 14:30   ` Will Deacon
2014-10-09  2:25     ` AKASHI Takahiro
2014-10-02  9:46 ` [PATCH v7 6/6] arm64: add seccomp support AKASHI Takahiro

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=20141008142328.GR26140@arm.com \
    --to=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).