From: dave.long@linaro.org (David Long)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v12 05/10] arm64: Kprobes with single stepping support
Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 15:25:54 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57474DC2.5070400@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160518122935.39fd7acc63d6f9c17fcbe275@kernel.org>
On 05/17/2016 11:29 PM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> On Tue, 17 May 2016 16:58:09 +0800
> Huang Shijie <shijie.huang@arm.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 02:53:00PM -0400, David Long wrote:
>>> +
>>> +/*
>>> + * Interrupts need to be disabled before single-step mode is set, and not
>>> + * reenabled until after single-step mode ends.
>>> + * Without disabling interrupt on local CPU, there is a chance of
>>> + * interrupt occurrence in the period of exception return and start of
>>> + * out-of-line single-step, that result in wrongly single stepping
>>> + * into the interrupt handler.
>>> + */
>>> +static void __kprobes kprobes_save_local_irqflag(struct pt_regs *regs)
>>> +{
>>> + struct kprobe_ctlblk *kcb = get_kprobe_ctlblk();
>>
>> Why not add a parameter for this function to save the @kcb?
>
> Good catch, it should use same kcb of caller.
>
I've made the change for the next version of the patch.
>>
>>> +
>>> + kcb->saved_irqflag = regs->pstate;
>>> + regs->pstate |= PSR_I_BIT;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static void __kprobes kprobes_restore_local_irqflag(struct pt_regs *regs)
>>> +{
>>> + struct kprobe_ctlblk *kcb = get_kprobe_ctlblk();
>> ditto.
>>
I've made the change.
>>> +
>>> + if (kcb->saved_irqflag & PSR_I_BIT)
>>> + regs->pstate |= PSR_I_BIT;
>>> + else
>>> + regs->pstate &= ~PSR_I_BIT;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static void __kprobes
>>> +set_ss_context(struct kprobe_ctlblk *kcb, unsigned long addr)
>>> +{
>>> + kcb->ss_ctx.ss_pending = true;
>>> + kcb->ss_ctx.match_addr = addr + sizeof(kprobe_opcode_t);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static void __kprobes clear_ss_context(struct kprobe_ctlblk *kcb)
>>> +{
>>> + kcb->ss_ctx.ss_pending = false;
>>> + kcb->ss_ctx.match_addr = 0;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static void __kprobes setup_singlestep(struct kprobe *p,
>>> + struct pt_regs *regs,
>>> + struct kprobe_ctlblk *kcb, int reenter)
>>> +{
>>> + unsigned long slot;
>>> +
>>> + if (reenter) {
>>> + save_previous_kprobe(kcb);
>>> + set_current_kprobe(p);
>>> + kcb->kprobe_status = KPROBE_REENTER;
>>> + } else {
>>> + kcb->kprobe_status = KPROBE_HIT_SS;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + if (p->ainsn.insn) {
>>> + /* prepare for single stepping */
>>> + slot = (unsigned long)p->ainsn.insn;
>>> +
>>> + set_ss_context(kcb, slot); /* mark pending ss */
>>> +
>>> + if (kcb->kprobe_status == KPROBE_REENTER)
>>> + spsr_set_debug_flag(regs, 0);
>>> +
>>> + /* IRQs and single stepping do not mix well. */
>>> + kprobes_save_local_irqflag(regs);
>>> + kernel_enable_single_step(regs);
>>> + instruction_pointer(regs) = slot;
>>> + } else {
>>> + BUG();
>
> You'd better use BUG_ON(!p->ainsn.insn);
>
I have that change ready but the BUG*() is removed entirely in patch
07/10 and the indentation changed back to the above, resulting in more
diffs and the same final code.
>>> + }
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int __kprobes reenter_kprobe(struct kprobe *p,
>>> + struct pt_regs *regs,
>>> + struct kprobe_ctlblk *kcb)
>>> +{
>>> + switch (kcb->kprobe_status) {
>>> + case KPROBE_HIT_SSDONE:
>>> + case KPROBE_HIT_ACTIVE:
>>> + kprobes_inc_nmissed_count(p);
>>> + setup_singlestep(p, regs, kcb, 1);
>>> + break;
>>> + case KPROBE_HIT_SS:
>>> + case KPROBE_REENTER:
>>> + pr_warn("Unrecoverable kprobe detected at %p.\n", p->addr);
>>> + dump_kprobe(p);
>>> + BUG();
>>> + break;
>>> + default:
>>> + WARN_ON(1);
>>> + return 0;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + return 1;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static void __kprobes
>>> +post_kprobe_handler(struct kprobe_ctlblk *kcb, struct pt_regs *regs)
>>> +{
>>> + struct kprobe *cur = kprobe_running();
>>> +
>>> + if (!cur)
>>> + return;
>>> +
>>> + /* return addr restore if non-branching insn */
>>> + if (cur->ainsn.restore.type == RESTORE_PC) {
>>> + instruction_pointer(regs) = cur->ainsn.restore.addr;
>>> + if (!instruction_pointer(regs))
>>> + BUG();
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + /* restore back original saved kprobe variables and continue */
>>> + if (kcb->kprobe_status == KPROBE_REENTER) {
>>> + restore_previous_kprobe(kcb);
>>> + return;
>>> + }
>>> + /* call post handler */
>>> + kcb->kprobe_status = KPROBE_HIT_SSDONE;
>>> + if (cur->post_handler) {
>>> + /* post_handler can hit breakpoint and single step
>>> + * again, so we enable D-flag for recursive exception.
>>> + */
>>> + cur->post_handler(cur, regs, 0);
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + reset_current_kprobe();
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +int __kprobes kprobe_fault_handler(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned int fsr)
>>> +{
>>> + struct kprobe *cur = kprobe_running();
>>> + struct kprobe_ctlblk *kcb = get_kprobe_ctlblk();
>>> +
>>> + switch (kcb->kprobe_status) {
>>> + case KPROBE_HIT_SS:
>>> + case KPROBE_REENTER:
>>> + /*
>>> + * We are here because the instruction being single
>>> + * stepped caused a page fault. We reset the current
>>> + * kprobe and the ip points back to the probe address
>>> + * and allow the page fault handler to continue as a
>>> + * normal page fault.
>>> + */
>>> + instruction_pointer(regs) = (unsigned long)cur->addr;
>>> + if (!instruction_pointer(regs))
>>> + BUG();
>
> This can be BUG_ON(!instruction_pointer(regs)).
>
I've made the change.
>>> + if (kcb->kprobe_status == KPROBE_REENTER)
>>> + restore_previous_kprobe(kcb);
>>> + else
>>> + reset_current_kprobe();
>>> +
>>> + break;
>>> + case KPROBE_HIT_ACTIVE:
>>> + case KPROBE_HIT_SSDONE:
>>> + /*
>>> + * We increment the nmissed count for accounting,
>>> + * we can also use npre/npostfault count for accounting
>>> + * these specific fault cases.
>>> + */
>>> + kprobes_inc_nmissed_count(cur);
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * We come here because instructions in the pre/post
>>> + * handler caused the page_fault, this could happen
>>> + * if handler tries to access user space by
>>> + * copy_from_user(), get_user() etc. Let the
>>> + * user-specified handler try to fix it first.
>>> + */
>>> + if (cur->fault_handler && cur->fault_handler(cur, regs, fsr))
>>> + return 1;
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * In case the user-specified fault handler returned
>>> + * zero, try to fix up.
>>> + */
>>> + if (fixup_exception(regs))
>>> + return 1;
>>> + }
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +int __kprobes kprobe_exceptions_notify(struct notifier_block *self,
>>> + unsigned long val, void *data)
>>> +{
>>> + return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static void __kprobes kprobe_handler(struct pt_regs *regs)
>>> +{
>>> + struct kprobe *p, *cur_kprobe;
>>> + struct kprobe_ctlblk *kcb;
>>> + unsigned long addr = instruction_pointer(regs);
>>> +
>>> + kcb = get_kprobe_ctlblk();
>>> + cur_kprobe = kprobe_running();
>>> +
>>> + p = get_kprobe((kprobe_opcode_t *) addr);
>>> +
>>> + if (p) {
>>> + if (cur_kprobe) {
>>> + if (reenter_kprobe(p, regs, kcb))
>>> + return;
>>> + } else {
>>> + /* Probe hit */
>>> + set_current_kprobe(p);
>>> + kcb->kprobe_status = KPROBE_HIT_ACTIVE;
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * If we have no pre-handler or it returned 0, we
>>> + * continue with normal processing. If we have a
>>> + * pre-handler and it returned non-zero, it prepped
>>> + * for calling the break_handler below on re-entry,
>>> + * so get out doing nothing more here.
>>> + *
>>> + * pre_handler can hit a breakpoint and can step thru
>>> + * before return, keep PSTATE D-flag enabled until
>>> + * pre_handler return back.
>>> + */
>>> + if (!p->pre_handler || !p->pre_handler(p, regs)) {
>>> + kcb->kprobe_status = KPROBE_HIT_SS;
>> The above line is duplicated.
>> You will set KPROBE_HIT_SS in the setup_singlestep.
>
> Right.
>
I've removed it.
>>
>>> + setup_singlestep(p, regs, kcb, 0);
>>> + return;
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>> + } else if ((le32_to_cpu(*(kprobe_opcode_t *) addr) ==
>>> + BRK64_OPCODE_KPROBES) && cur_kprobe) {
>>> + /* We probably hit a jprobe. Call its break handler. */
>>> + if (cur_kprobe->break_handler &&
>>> + cur_kprobe->break_handler(cur_kprobe, regs)) {
>>> + kcb->kprobe_status = KPROBE_HIT_SS;
>> ditto
I've removed it.
>>> + setup_singlestep(cur_kprobe, regs, kcb, 0);
>>> + return;
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>> + /*
>>> + * The breakpoint instruction was removed right
>>> + * after we hit it. Another cpu has removed
>>> + * either a probepoint or a debugger breakpoint
>>> + * at this address. In either case, no further
>>> + * handling of this interrupt is appropriate.
>>> + * Return back to original instruction, and continue.
>>> + */
>>> +}
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
Thanks,
-dl
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-26 19:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-27 18:52 [PATCH v12 00/10] arm64: Add kernel probes (kprobes) support David Long
2016-04-27 18:52 ` [PATCH v12 01/10] arm64: Add HAVE_REGS_AND_STACK_ACCESS_API feature David Long
2016-04-28 16:08 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-05-13 19:07 ` David Long
2016-05-17 9:14 ` Huang Shijie
2016-05-20 4:18 ` David Long
2016-04-27 18:52 ` [PATCH v12 02/10] arm64: Add more test functions to insn.c David Long
2016-04-27 18:52 ` [PATCH v12 03/10] arm64: add conditional instruction simulation support David Long
2016-04-27 18:52 ` [PATCH v12 04/10] arm64: Blacklist non-kprobe-able symbols David Long
2016-04-27 18:53 ` [PATCH v12 05/10] arm64: Kprobes with single stepping support David Long
2016-05-12 15:01 ` James Morse
2016-05-18 4:04 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2016-05-20 5:16 ` David Long
2016-05-17 8:58 ` Huang Shijie
2016-05-18 3:29 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2016-05-26 19:25 ` David Long [this message]
2016-05-26 15:40 ` David Long
2016-05-17 9:10 ` Huang Shijie
2016-06-01 5:15 ` David Long
2016-04-27 18:53 ` [PATCH v12 06/10] arm64: Treat all entry code as non-kprobe-able David Long
2016-05-12 14:49 ` James Morse
2016-05-20 5:28 ` David Long
2016-05-26 15:26 ` David Long
2016-04-27 18:53 ` [PATCH v12 07/10] arm64: kprobes instruction simulation support David Long
2016-05-19 1:52 ` Huang Shijie
2016-05-26 19:28 ` David Long
2016-04-27 18:53 ` [PATCH v12 08/10] arm64: Add trampoline code for kretprobes David Long
2016-04-27 18:53 ` [PATCH v12 09/10] arm64: Add kernel return probes support (kretprobes) David Long
2016-04-27 18:53 ` [PATCH v12 10/10] kprobes: Add arm64 case in kprobe example module David Long
2016-05-17 9:57 ` Huang Shijie
2016-05-17 10:24 ` Mark Brown
2016-05-18 1:31 ` Huang Shijie
2016-05-11 15:33 ` [PATCH v12 00/10] arm64: Add kernel probes (kprobes) support James Morse
2016-05-12 2:26 ` Li Bin
2016-05-13 20:02 ` David Long
2016-05-18 2:24 ` Huang Shijie
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=57474DC2.5070400@linaro.org \
--to=dave.long@linaro.org \
--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).