From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Renzo Davoli" <renzo@cs.unibo.it>
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, "Heiko Carstens" <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
"Vasily Gorbik" <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
"Alexander Gordeev" <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
"Christian Borntraeger" <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 2/3] ptrace: add PTRACE_SET_SYSCALL_INFO syscall skipping support
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2026 17:24:45 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-213302@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261113165509.229869-3-renzo@cs.unibo.it>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential
issues to consider:
- [High] ptrace: ptrace_set_syscall_info_seccomp_skip() breaks syscall
skip on powerpc
- [Medium] ptrace: stale SECCOMP op in ptrace_get_syscall_info_op()
after syscall skip
--
commit 8c9888f26aefc1ee67703974a37b40daf729c189
Author: Renzo Davoli <renzo@cs.unibo.it>
ptrace: add PTRACE_SET_SYSCALL_INFO syscall skipping support
This commit extends PTRACE_SET_SYSCALL_INFO to allow a tracer at a
PTRACE_SYSCALL_INFO_SECCOMP stop to skip the system call and set its return
value by changing info.op to PTRACE_SYSCALL_INFO_EXIT.
> diff --git a/kernel/ptrace.c b/kernel/ptrace.c
> index 3f2fe68ccb140..7630fcd398105 100644
> --- a/kernel/ptrace.c
> +++ b/kernel/ptrace.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -1119,12 +1120,35 @@ ptrace_set_syscall_info_exit(struct task_struct *child, struct pt_regs *regs,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +/*
> + * Skip the system call at a PTRACE_SYSCALL_INFO_SECCOMP stop and set its
> + * return value as specified by info->exit.
> + *
> + * The skip request is passed to seccomp out of band instead of by setting
> + * the system call number to -1: on some architectures the syscall number,
> + * or the register seccomp reads it from, shares a register with the return
> + * value, and on others -1 cannot be represented as a syscall number.
> + */
> +static int
> +ptrace_set_syscall_info_seccomp_skip(struct task_struct *child,
> + struct pt_regs *regs,
> + struct ptrace_syscall_info *info)
> +{
> + int ret = ptrace_set_syscall_info_exit(child, regs, info);
> +
> + if (!ret)
> + seccomp_ptrace_skip_syscall(child);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
[Severity: High]
Does calling ptrace_set_syscall_info_exit() -> syscall_set_return_value() from
a seccomp stop work on powerpc?
arch/powerpc/include/asm/syscall.h:syscall_set_return_value() {
...
set_thread_flag(TIF_SYSCALL_RET);
}
arch/powerpc/kernel/syscall.c:system_call_exception() {
if (unlikely(!syscall_enter_from_user_mode_randomize_stack(regs, &r0) ||
test_thread_flag(TIF_SYSCALL_RET))) {
clear_thread_flag(TIF_SYSCALL_RET);
return syscall_get_error(current, regs);
}
...
}
Because syscall_set_return_value() calls set_thread_flag(TIF_SYSCALL_RET)
rather than set_tsk_thread_flag(task, TIF_SYSCALL_RET), calling it from the
tracer sets TIF_SYSCALL_RET on current (the tracer), causing
system_call_exception() to skip the tracer's next system call (such as
PTRACE_CONT) and return 0.
In addition, when the tracee resumes from the skipped seccomp stop with a
non-error return value (info->exit.is_error == 0), system_call_exception()
returns syscall_get_error(current, regs), which is 0 when no error is set, and
syscall_exit_prepare() overwrites regs->gpr[3] with that 0, clobbering the
return value set by the tracer.
>
> static int
> ptrace_set_syscall_info(struct task_struct *child, unsigned long user_size,
> const void __user *datavp)
> {
> struct pt_regs *regs = task_pt_regs(child);
> struct ptrace_syscall_info info;
> + int op;
>
> if (user_size < sizeof(info))
> return -EINVAL;
> @@ -1141,8 +1165,25 @@ ptrace_set_syscall_info(struct task_struct *child, unsigned long user_size,
> if (info.flags || info.reserved)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - /* Changing the type of the system call stop is not supported yet. */
> - if (ptrace_get_syscall_info_op(child) != info.op)
> + op = ptrace_get_syscall_info_op(child);
> +
> + /*
> + * Changing the type of the system call stop is not supported, except
> + * that a PTRACE_SYSCALL_INFO_SECCOMP stop can be turned into a
> + * PTRACE_SYSCALL_INFO_EXIT one to skip the system call and set its
> + * return value. Once that is done, the system call number and
> + * arguments cannot be changed anymore during the same stop, as the
> + * return value might share registers with them.
> + */
> + if (op == PTRACE_SYSCALL_INFO_SECCOMP) {
> + if (info.op == PTRACE_SYSCALL_INFO_EXIT)
> + return ptrace_set_syscall_info_seccomp_skip(child, regs,
> + &info);
> + if (seccomp_ptrace_syscall_skipped(child))
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
[Severity: Medium]
Should ptrace_get_syscall_info_op() also return PTRACE_SYSCALL_INFO_EXIT once
seccomp_ptrace_syscall_skipped(child) is true?
Right now, ptrace_get_syscall_info_op() continues to return
PTRACE_SYSCALL_INFO_SECCOMP for SIGTRAP | (PTRACE_EVENT_SECCOMP << 8) even
after the syscall has been skipped. If the tracer calls
PTRACE_GET_SYSCALL_INFO later during the same stop, ptrace_get_syscall_info()
still reports op == PTRACE_SYSCALL_INFO_SECCOMP and populates info.seccomp from
pt_regs whose syscall number or argument registers may already have been
overwritten by syscall_set_return_value(), and passing that structure back to
PTRACE_SET_SYSCALL_INFO fails with -EINVAL.
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261113165509.229869-1-renzo@cs.unibo.it?part=2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-13 17:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-13 16:55 [PATCH v10 0/3] PTRACE_SET_SYSCALL_INFO: add support for seccomp syscall skipping Renzo Davoli
2026-11-13 16:55 ` [PATCH v10 1/3] seccomp: let the tracer skip a syscall independently of its number Renzo Davoli
2026-11-13 17:09 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-13 16:55 ` [PATCH v10 2/3] ptrace: add PTRACE_SET_SYSCALL_INFO syscall skipping support Renzo Davoli
2026-11-13 17:24 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-11-13 16:55 ` [PATCH v10 3/3] selftests/ptrace: add a test case for PTRACE_SET_SYSCALL_INFO syscall skipping Renzo Davoli
2026-11-13 17:04 ` sashiko-bot
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=sashiko-outbox-213302@kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=renzo@cs.unibo.it \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/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