public inbox for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Bill Tsui <b10902118@ntu.edu.tw>
Cc: oleg@redhat.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, nathan@kernel.org,
	nick.desaulniers+lkml@gmail.com, morbo@google.com,
	justinstitt@google.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] arm64: ptrace: fix hw_break_set() to set addr and ctrl together
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2025 16:14:30 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aRdVZmeOHYbm24NJ@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251018133731.42505-2-b10902118@ntu.edu.tw>

On Sat, Oct 18, 2025 at 09:37:31PM +0800, Bill Tsui wrote:
> This patch fixes the failure of PTRACE_SETREGSET when setting a hardware
> breakpoint on a non-4-byte aligned address with a valid control to a
> 32-bit tracee. The issue was discovered while testing LLDB.
> 
> Link: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152284
> 
> The failure happens because hw_break_set() checks and sets the breakpoint
> address and control separately. This can result in an check failure when
> it first validates the address to be set with old control.
> 
> For example, the control are initialized with breakpoint length of 4.
> Combining with a non-4-byte aligned address would cross a 4-byte boundary,
> which is invalid. However, the user-provided control may actually specify a
> length of 1, which should be valid.
> 
> The fix is to set the address and control together.

... but you only implement this for the native (64-bit) case, so I don't
understand how it helps with the problem above.

> For reference, the check is in
> 	arch/arm64/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c:hw_breakpoint_arch_parse()
> which is called via:
> 	modify_user_hw_breakpoint()
> 	-> modify_user_hw_breakpoint_check()
> 	-> hw_breakpoint_parse()
> 	-> hw_breakpoint_arch_parse()

You don't need to include these details here.

> @@ -524,9 +506,6 @@ static int hw_break_set(struct task_struct *target,
>  			return -EINVAL;
>  		ret = user_regset_copyin(&pos, &count, &kbuf, &ubuf, &addr,
>  					 offset, offset + PTRACE_HBP_ADDR_SZ);
> -		if (ret)
> -			return ret;
> -		ret = ptrace_hbp_set_addr(note_type, target, idx, addr);
>  		if (ret)
>  			return ret;
>  		offset += PTRACE_HBP_ADDR_SZ;
> @@ -537,10 +516,11 @@ static int hw_break_set(struct task_struct *target,
>  					 offset, offset + PTRACE_HBP_CTRL_SZ);
>  		if (ret)
>  			return ret;
> -		ret = ptrace_hbp_set_ctrl(note_type, target, idx, ctrl);
> +		offset += PTRACE_HBP_CTRL_SZ;
> +
> +		ret = ptrace_hbp_set(note_type, target, idx, addr, ctrl);

Doesn't this break the case where userspace tries only to set the address?
The loop will break out when !count without updating anything.

As I mentioned before, I'd prefer to leave this code as-is short of
removing the indirection through perf entirely.

Will


  reply	other threads:[~2025-11-14 16:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-08-24 12:43 [PATCH 0/3] ARM/arm64: ptrace: fix unaligned hardware breakpoint validation for 32bit b10902118
2025-08-24 12:43 ` [PATCH 1/3] arm64: ptrace: fix hw_break_set() by setting addr and ctrl together b10902118
2025-08-24 12:43 ` [PATCH 2/3] arm64: ptrace: minimize default bp_len for hw breakpoints to pass check b10902118
2025-08-24 12:43 ` [PATCH 3/3] ARM: " b10902118
2025-08-26 19:37 ` [PATCH 0/3] ARM/arm64: ptrace: fix unaligned hardware breakpoint validation for 32bit Catalin Marinas
2025-08-27  1:41 ` [PATCH v2 " Bill Tsui
2025-08-27  1:41   ` [PATCH v2 1/3] arm64: ptrace: fix hw_break_set() by setting addr and ctrl together Bill Tsui
2025-09-08 15:14     ` Will Deacon
2025-09-09  1:50       ` b10902118
2025-09-09  1:57       ` Bill Tsui
2025-09-17 14:23         ` Bill Tsui
2025-08-27  1:41   ` [PATCH v2 2/3] arm64: ptrace: minimize default bp_len for hw breakpoints to pass check Bill Tsui
2025-08-27  1:41   ` [PATCH v2 3/3] ARM: " Bill Tsui
2025-10-16 15:44   ` [PATCH v3 0/1] arm64: ptrace: fix hw_break_set() to set addr and ctrl together Bill Tsui
2025-10-16 15:44     ` [PATCH v3 1/1] " Bill Tsui
2025-10-18  8:24       ` kernel test robot
2025-10-18 13:37     ` [PATCH v4 0/1] " Bill Tsui
2025-10-18 13:37       ` [PATCH v4 1/1] " Bill Tsui
2025-11-14 16:14         ` Will Deacon [this message]
2025-11-15  3:44           ` Bill Tsui

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=aRdVZmeOHYbm24NJ@willie-the-truck \
    --to=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=b10902118@ntu.edu.tw \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=justinstitt@google.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=morbo@google.com \
    --cc=nathan@kernel.org \
    --cc=nick.desaulniers+lkml@gmail.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    /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