From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: He Zhe <zhe.he@windriver.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
oleg@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-audit@redhat.com, will@kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm64: ptrace: Add is_syscall_success to handle compat
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 18:17:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210421171715.GA52940@C02TD0UTHF1T.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9b5b340b-66ad-41c9-865e-32724e33a5b8@windriver.com>
On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 04:42:53PM +0800, He Zhe wrote:
> On 4/16/21 8:33 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 03:55:31PM +0800, He Zhe wrote:
> >> The general version of is_syscall_success does not handle 32-bit
> >> compatible case, which would cause 32-bit negative return code to be
> >> recoganized as a positive number later and seen as a "success".
> >>
> >> Since is_compat_thread is defined in compat.h, implementing
> >> is_syscall_success in ptrace.h would introduce build failure due to
> >> recursive inclusion of some basic headers like mutex.h. We put the
> >> implementation to ptrace.c
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: He Zhe <zhe.he@windriver.com>
> >> ---
> >> arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h | 3 +++
> >> arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c | 10 ++++++++++
> >> 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h
> >> index e58bca832dff..3c415e9e5d85 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h
> >> @@ -328,6 +328,9 @@ static inline void regs_set_return_value(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long rc)
> >> regs->regs[0] = rc;
> >> }
> >>
> >> +extern inline int is_syscall_success(struct pt_regs *regs);
> >> +#define is_syscall_success(regs) is_syscall_success(regs)
> >> +
> >> /**
> >> * regs_get_kernel_argument() - get Nth function argument in kernel
> >> * @regs: pt_regs of that context
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c
> >> index 170f42fd6101..3266201f8c60 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c
> >> @@ -1909,3 +1909,13 @@ int valid_user_regs(struct user_pt_regs *regs, struct task_struct *task)
> >> else
> >> return valid_native_regs(regs);
> >> }
> >> +
> >> +inline int is_syscall_success(struct pt_regs *regs)
> >> +{
> >> + unsigned long val = regs->regs[0];
> >> +
> >> + if (is_compat_thread(task_thread_info(current)))
> >> + val = sign_extend64(val, 31);
> >> +
> >> + return !IS_ERR_VALUE(val);
> >> +}
> > It's better to use compat_user_mode(regs) here instead of
> > is_compat_thread(). It saves us from worrying whether regs are for the
> > current context.
>
> Thanks. I'll use this for v2.
>
> >
> > I think we should change regs_return_value() instead. This function
> > seems to be called from several other places and it has the same
> > potential problems if called on compat pt_regs.
>
> IMHO, now that we have had specific function, syscall_get_return_value, to get
> syscall return code, we might as well use it. regs_return_value may be left for
> where we want internal return code. I found such places below and haven't found
> other places that syscall sign extension is concerned about.
>
> kernel/test_kprobes.c
> kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c
> samples/kprobes/kretprobe_example.c
FWIW, I agree that we should use syscall_get_return_value(). If we make
the common implementation of is_syscall_success() use
syscall_get_return_value(), we shouldn't need to write our own
implementation, so I'd prefer if we could do that if possible.
IIUC regs_get_return_value() was originally meant to be used for kernel
regs, and is trying to do something quite different, so having the core
code use syscall_get_return_value() makes sense to allow architectures
to handle those cases differently.
Thanks,
Mark.
--
Linux-audit mailing list
Linux-audit@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-21 19:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-16 7:55 [PATCH 1/3] arm64: ptrace: Add is_syscall_success to handle compat He Zhe
2021-04-16 7:55 ` [PATCH 2/3] arm64: syscall.h: Add sign extension handling in syscall_get_return_value for compat He Zhe
2021-04-16 9:43 ` Oleg Nesterov
2021-04-20 8:38 ` He Zhe
2021-04-21 17:41 ` Mark Rutland
2021-04-22 16:55 ` Mark Rutland
2021-04-16 7:55 ` [PATCH 3/3] audit: Use syscall_get_return_value to get syscall return code in audit_syscall_exit He Zhe
2021-04-16 12:33 ` [PATCH 1/3] arm64: ptrace: Add is_syscall_success to handle compat Catalin Marinas
2021-04-16 13:34 ` Mark Rutland
2021-04-17 13:19 ` David Laight
2021-04-19 12:19 ` Will Deacon
2021-04-20 8:54 ` He Zhe
2021-04-21 17:10 ` Mark Rutland
2021-04-22 16:07 ` Will Deacon
2021-04-22 16:42 ` Mark Rutland
2021-04-22 18:57 ` Dmitry V. Levin
2021-04-20 8:42 ` He Zhe
2021-04-21 17:17 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
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=20210421171715.GA52940@C02TD0UTHF1T.local \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-audit@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=zhe.he@windriver.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