[PATCH] kprobes: avoid crash when rmmod/insmod modules after ftrace_disabled

[PATCH] kprobes: avoid crash when rmmod/insmod modules after ftrace_disabled

[Ye Bin]

From: Ye Bin <yebin10@huawei.com>

There's a issue as follows when rmmod modules after ftrace disabled:
BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: fffffbfff805000d
PGD 817fcc067 P4D 817fcc067 PUD 817fc8067 PMD 101555067 PTE 0
Oops: Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI
CPU: 4 UID: 0 PID: 2012 Comm: rmmod Tainted: G        W  OE
Tainted: [W]=WARN, [O]=OOT_MODULE, [E]=UNSIGNED_MODULE
RIP: 0010:kprobes_module_callback+0x89/0x790
RSP: 0018:ffff88812e157d30 EFLAGS: 00010a02
RAX: 1ffffffff805000d RBX: dffffc0000000000 RCX: ffffffff86a8de90
RDX: ffffed1025c2af9b RSI: 0000000000000008 RDI: ffffffffc0280068
RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: ffffed1025c2af9a
R10: ffff88812e157cd7 R11: 205d323130325420 R12: 0000000000000002
R13: ffffffffc0290488 R14: 0000000000000002 R15: ffffffffc0280040
FS:  00007fbc450dd740(0000) GS:ffff888420331000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
CR2: fffffbfff805000d CR3: 000000010f624000 CR4: 00000000000006f0
Call Trace:
 <TASK>
 notifier_call_chain+0xc6/0x280
 blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x60/0x90
 __do_sys_delete_module.constprop.0+0x32a/0x4e0
 do_syscall_64+0x5d/0xfa0
 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e

The above issue occurs because the kprobe was not removed from the hash
list after ftrace_disable.
To prevent the system from restarting unexpectedly after ftrace_disable,
in such cases, unregister_kprobe() ensures that the probe is removed from
the hash list, preventing subsequent access to already freed memory.

Fixes: 6f0f1dd71953 ("kprobes: Cleanup disabling and unregistering path")
Signed-off-by: Ye Bin <yebin10@huawei.com>
---
 kernel/kprobes.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c
index ab8f9fc1f0d1..d735a608b810 100644
--- a/kernel/kprobes.c
+++ b/kernel/kprobes.c
@@ -1731,8 +1731,30 @@ static int __unregister_kprobe_top(struct kprobe *p)
 
 	/* Disable kprobe. This will disarm it if needed. */
 	ap = __disable_kprobe(p);
-	if (IS_ERR(ap))
-		return PTR_ERR(ap);
+	if (IS_ERR(ap)) {
+		int ret = PTR_ERR(ap);
+
+		/*
+		 * If ftrace disabled we need to delete kprobe node from
+		 * hlist or aggregation list. If nodes are not removed when
+		 * modules are removed, the already released nodes will
+		 * remain in the linked list. Subsequent access to the
+		 * linked list may then trigger exceptions.
+		 */
+		if (ret != -ENODEV)
+			return ret;
+
+		ap = __get_valid_kprobe(p);
+		if (!ap)
+			return ret;
+
+		if (ap == p)
+			hlist_del_rcu(&ap->hlist);
+		else
+			list_del_rcu(&p->list);
+
+		return ret;
+	}
 
 	WARN_ON(ap != p && !kprobe_aggrprobe(ap));
 
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH] kprobes: avoid crash when rmmod/insmod modules after ftrace_disabled

[Masami Hiramatsu]

Hi,

Thanks for reporting!


On Tue, 25 Nov 2025 10:05:36 +0800
Ye Bin <yebin@huaweicloud.com> wrote:

> From: Ye Bin <yebin10@huawei.com>
> 
> There's a issue as follows when rmmod modules after ftrace disabled:

You may see something like;

Failed to unregister kprobe-ftrace (error -19)

or

Failed to disarm kprobe-ftrace at <function name> (error -19)

right before this BUG, don't you?
If you reported with that line, it's more easier to understand.


> BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: fffffbfff805000d
> PGD 817fcc067 P4D 817fcc067 PUD 817fc8067 PMD 101555067 PTE 0
> Oops: Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI
> CPU: 4 UID: 0 PID: 2012 Comm: rmmod Tainted: G        W  OE
> Tainted: [W]=WARN, [O]=OOT_MODULE, [E]=UNSIGNED_MODULE
> RIP: 0010:kprobes_module_callback+0x89/0x790
> RSP: 0018:ffff88812e157d30 EFLAGS: 00010a02
> RAX: 1ffffffff805000d RBX: dffffc0000000000 RCX: ffffffff86a8de90
> RDX: ffffed1025c2af9b RSI: 0000000000000008 RDI: ffffffffc0280068
> RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: ffffed1025c2af9a
> R10: ffff88812e157cd7 R11: 205d323130325420 R12: 0000000000000002
> R13: ffffffffc0290488 R14: 0000000000000002 R15: ffffffffc0280040
> FS:  00007fbc450dd740(0000) GS:ffff888420331000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> CR2: fffffbfff805000d CR3: 000000010f624000 CR4: 00000000000006f0
> Call Trace:
>  <TASK>
>  notifier_call_chain+0xc6/0x280
>  blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x60/0x90
>  __do_sys_delete_module.constprop.0+0x32a/0x4e0
>  do_syscall_64+0x5d/0xfa0
>  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
> 
> The above issue occurs because the kprobe was not removed from the hash
> list after ftrace_disable.
> To prevent the system from restarting unexpectedly after ftrace_disable,
> in such cases, unregister_kprobe() ensures that the probe is removed from
> the hash list, preventing subsequent access to already freed memory.
> 
> Fixes: 6f0f1dd71953 ("kprobes: Cleanup disabling and unregistering path")
> Signed-off-by: Ye Bin <yebin10@huawei.com>
> ---
>  kernel/kprobes.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c
> index ab8f9fc1f0d1..d735a608b810 100644
> --- a/kernel/kprobes.c
> +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c
> @@ -1731,8 +1731,30 @@ static int __unregister_kprobe_top(struct kprobe *p)
>  
>  	/* Disable kprobe. This will disarm it if needed. */
>  	ap = __disable_kprobe(p);
> -	if (IS_ERR(ap))
> -		return PTR_ERR(ap);
> +	if (IS_ERR(ap)) {
> +		int ret = PTR_ERR(ap);
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * If ftrace disabled we need to delete kprobe node from
> +		 * hlist or aggregation list. If nodes are not removed when
> +		 * modules are removed, the already released nodes will
> +		 * remain in the linked list. Subsequent access to the
> +		 * linked list may then trigger exceptions.
> +		 */
> +		if (ret != -ENODEV)
> +			return ret;
> +
> +		ap = __get_valid_kprobe(p);
> +		if (!ap)
> +			return ret;
> +
> +		if (ap == p)
> +			hlist_del_rcu(&ap->hlist);
> +		else
> +			list_del_rcu(&p->list);

Instead of repeating this process, we should ignore
-ENODEV error from ftrace directly. BTW, ftrace_disabled is set
when ftrace_kill() is called, that means ftrace is no more usable.
So I think we can just ignore ftrace operation in
__disarm_kprobe_ftrace().

Thank you,


> +
> +		return ret;
> +	}
>  
>  	WARN_ON(ap != p && !kprobe_aggrprobe(ap));
>  
> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>

Re: [PATCH] kprobes: avoid crash when rmmod/insmod modules after ftrace_disabled

[Masami Hiramatsu]

On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 12:52:48 +0900
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Thanks for reporting!
> 
> 
> On Tue, 25 Nov 2025 10:05:36 +0800
> Ye Bin <yebin@huaweicloud.com> wrote:
> 
> > From: Ye Bin <yebin10@huawei.com>
> > 
> > There's a issue as follows when rmmod modules after ftrace disabled:
> 
> You may see something like;
> 
> Failed to unregister kprobe-ftrace (error -19)
> 
> or
> 
> Failed to disarm kprobe-ftrace at <function name> (error -19)
> 
> right before this BUG, don't you?
> If you reported with that line, it's more easier to understand.
> 
> 
> > BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: fffffbfff805000d
> > PGD 817fcc067 P4D 817fcc067 PUD 817fc8067 PMD 101555067 PTE 0
> > Oops: Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI
> > CPU: 4 UID: 0 PID: 2012 Comm: rmmod Tainted: G        W  OE
> > Tainted: [W]=WARN, [O]=OOT_MODULE, [E]=UNSIGNED_MODULE
> > RIP: 0010:kprobes_module_callback+0x89/0x790
> > RSP: 0018:ffff88812e157d30 EFLAGS: 00010a02
> > RAX: 1ffffffff805000d RBX: dffffc0000000000 RCX: ffffffff86a8de90
> > RDX: ffffed1025c2af9b RSI: 0000000000000008 RDI: ffffffffc0280068
> > RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: ffffed1025c2af9a
> > R10: ffff88812e157cd7 R11: 205d323130325420 R12: 0000000000000002
> > R13: ffffffffc0290488 R14: 0000000000000002 R15: ffffffffc0280040
> > FS:  00007fbc450dd740(0000) GS:ffff888420331000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> > CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> > CR2: fffffbfff805000d CR3: 000000010f624000 CR4: 00000000000006f0
> > Call Trace:
> >  <TASK>
> >  notifier_call_chain+0xc6/0x280
> >  blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x60/0x90
> >  __do_sys_delete_module.constprop.0+0x32a/0x4e0
> >  do_syscall_64+0x5d/0xfa0
> >  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
> > 
> > The above issue occurs because the kprobe was not removed from the hash
> > list after ftrace_disable.
> > To prevent the system from restarting unexpectedly after ftrace_disable,
> > in such cases, unregister_kprobe() ensures that the probe is removed from
> > the hash list, preventing subsequent access to already freed memory.
> > 
> > Fixes: 6f0f1dd71953 ("kprobes: Cleanup disabling and unregistering path")
> > Signed-off-by: Ye Bin <yebin10@huawei.com>
> > ---
> >  kernel/kprobes.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >  1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c
> > index ab8f9fc1f0d1..d735a608b810 100644
> > --- a/kernel/kprobes.c
> > +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c
> > @@ -1731,8 +1731,30 @@ static int __unregister_kprobe_top(struct kprobe *p)
> >  
> >  	/* Disable kprobe. This will disarm it if needed. */
> >  	ap = __disable_kprobe(p);
> > -	if (IS_ERR(ap))
> > -		return PTR_ERR(ap);
> > +	if (IS_ERR(ap)) {
> > +		int ret = PTR_ERR(ap);
> > +
> > +		/*
> > +		 * If ftrace disabled we need to delete kprobe node from
> > +		 * hlist or aggregation list. If nodes are not removed when
> > +		 * modules are removed, the already released nodes will
> > +		 * remain in the linked list. Subsequent access to the
> > +		 * linked list may then trigger exceptions.
> > +		 */
> > +		if (ret != -ENODEV)
> > +			return ret;
> > +
> > +		ap = __get_valid_kprobe(p);
> > +		if (!ap)
> > +			return ret;
> > +
> > +		if (ap == p)
> > +			hlist_del_rcu(&ap->hlist);
> > +		else
> > +			list_del_rcu(&p->list);
> 
> Instead of repeating this process, we should ignore
> -ENODEV error from ftrace directly. BTW, ftrace_disabled is set
> when ftrace_kill() is called, that means ftrace is no more usable.
> So I think we can just ignore ftrace operation in
> __disarm_kprobe_ftrace().

So, what we need is;

diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c
index ab8f9fc1f0d1..17d451553389 100644
--- a/kernel/kprobes.c
+++ b/kernel/kprobes.c
@@ -1104,6 +1104,10 @@ static int __disarm_kprobe_ftrace(struct kprobe *p, struct ftrace_ops *ops,
 	int ret;
 
 	lockdep_assert_held(&kprobe_mutex);
+	if (unlikely(kprobe_ftrace_disabled)) {
+		/* Now ftrace is disabled forever, disarm is already done. */
+		return 0;
+	}
 
 	if (*cnt == 1) {
 		ret = unregister_ftrace_function(ops);


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>

Re: [PATCH] kprobes: avoid crash when rmmod/insmod modules after ftrace_disabled

[yebin]

On 2025/11/27 12:18, Masami Hiramatsu (Google) wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 12:52:48 +0900
> Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thanks for reporting!
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 25 Nov 2025 10:05:36 +0800
>> Ye Bin <yebin@huaweicloud.com> wrote:
>>
>>> From: Ye Bin <yebin10@huawei.com>
>>>
>>> There's a issue as follows when rmmod modules after ftrace disabled:
>>
>> You may see something like;
>>
>> Failed to unregister kprobe-ftrace (error -19)
>>
>> or
>>
>> Failed to disarm kprobe-ftrace at <function name> (error -19)
>>
>> right before this BUG, don't you?
>> If you reported with that line, it's more easier to understand.
>>
Yes, there is indeed a warning generated. I might not have expressed it 
clearly enough. The issue below is related to the problem that occurs 
when the second module is unloaded. When the first module was unloaded, 
some nodes were left in the hash list, causing a use-after-free (UAF) 
issue when traversing the hash list.
Therefore, this patch aims to resolve the UAF problem caused by residual 
nodes in the hash list after unloading a module while ftrace is disabled.
>>
>>> BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: fffffbfff805000d
>>> PGD 817fcc067 P4D 817fcc067 PUD 817fc8067 PMD 101555067 PTE 0
>>> Oops: Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI
>>> CPU: 4 UID: 0 PID: 2012 Comm: rmmod Tainted: G        W  OE
>>> Tainted: [W]=WARN, [O]=OOT_MODULE, [E]=UNSIGNED_MODULE
>>> RIP: 0010:kprobes_module_callback+0x89/0x790
>>> RSP: 0018:ffff88812e157d30 EFLAGS: 00010a02
>>> RAX: 1ffffffff805000d RBX: dffffc0000000000 RCX: ffffffff86a8de90
>>> RDX: ffffed1025c2af9b RSI: 0000000000000008 RDI: ffffffffc0280068
>>> RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: ffffed1025c2af9a
>>> R10: ffff88812e157cd7 R11: 205d323130325420 R12: 0000000000000002
>>> R13: ffffffffc0290488 R14: 0000000000000002 R15: ffffffffc0280040
>>> FS:  00007fbc450dd740(0000) GS:ffff888420331000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
>>> CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
>>> CR2: fffffbfff805000d CR3: 000000010f624000 CR4: 00000000000006f0
>>> Call Trace:
>>>   <TASK>
>>>   notifier_call_chain+0xc6/0x280
>>>   blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x60/0x90
>>>   __do_sys_delete_module.constprop.0+0x32a/0x4e0
>>>   do_syscall_64+0x5d/0xfa0
>>>   entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
>>>
>>> The above issue occurs because the kprobe was not removed from the hash
>>> list after ftrace_disable.
>>> To prevent the system from restarting unexpectedly after ftrace_disable,
>>> in such cases, unregister_kprobe() ensures that the probe is removed from
>>> the hash list, preventing subsequent access to already freed memory.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 6f0f1dd71953 ("kprobes: Cleanup disabling and unregistering path")
>>> Signed-off-by: Ye Bin <yebin10@huawei.com>
>>> ---
>>>   kernel/kprobes.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>   1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c
>>> index ab8f9fc1f0d1..d735a608b810 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/kprobes.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c
>>> @@ -1731,8 +1731,30 @@ static int __unregister_kprobe_top(struct kprobe *p)
>>>
>>>   	/* Disable kprobe. This will disarm it if needed. */
>>>   	ap = __disable_kprobe(p);
>>> -	if (IS_ERR(ap))
>>> -		return PTR_ERR(ap);
>>> +	if (IS_ERR(ap)) {
>>> +		int ret = PTR_ERR(ap);
>>> +
>>> +		/*
>>> +		 * If ftrace disabled we need to delete kprobe node from
>>> +		 * hlist or aggregation list. If nodes are not removed when
>>> +		 * modules are removed, the already released nodes will
>>> +		 * remain in the linked list. Subsequent access to the
>>> +		 * linked list may then trigger exceptions.
>>> +		 */
>>> +		if (ret != -ENODEV)
>>> +			return ret;
>>> +
>>> +		ap = __get_valid_kprobe(p);
>>> +		if (!ap)
>>> +			return ret;
>>> +
>>> +		if (ap == p)
>>> +			hlist_del_rcu(&ap->hlist);
>>> +		else
>>> +			list_del_rcu(&p->list);
>>
>> Instead of repeating this process, we should ignore
>> -ENODEV error from ftrace directly. BTW, ftrace_disabled is set
>> when ftrace_kill() is called, that means ftrace is no more usable.
>> So I think we can just ignore ftrace operation in
>> __disarm_kprobe_ftrace().
>
> So, what we need is;
>
> diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c
> index ab8f9fc1f0d1..17d451553389 100644
> --- a/kernel/kprobes.c
> +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c
> @@ -1104,6 +1104,10 @@ static int __disarm_kprobe_ftrace(struct kprobe *p, struct ftrace_ops *ops,
>   	int ret;
>
>   	lockdep_assert_held(&kprobe_mutex);
> +	if (unlikely(kprobe_ftrace_disabled)) {
> +		/* Now ftrace is disabled forever, disarm is already done. */
> +		return 0;
> +	}
>
>   	if (*cnt == 1) {
>   		ret = unregister_ftrace_function(ops);
>
>

Re: [PATCH] kprobes: avoid crash when rmmod/insmod modules after ftrace_disabled

[Masami Hiramatsu]

Cc: Steve,

Since this is caused by ftrace_kill.

On Fri, 28 Nov 2025 10:27:42 +0800
yebin <yebin@huaweicloud.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> On 2025/11/27 12:18, Masami Hiramatsu (Google) wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 12:52:48 +0900
> > Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Thanks for reporting!
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, 25 Nov 2025 10:05:36 +0800
> >> Ye Bin <yebin@huaweicloud.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> From: Ye Bin <yebin10@huawei.com>
> >>>
> >>> There's a issue as follows when rmmod modules after ftrace disabled:
> >>
> >> You may see something like;
> >>
> >> Failed to unregister kprobe-ftrace (error -19)
> >>
> >> or
> >>
> >> Failed to disarm kprobe-ftrace at <function name> (error -19)
> >>
> >> right before this BUG, don't you?
> >> If you reported with that line, it's more easier to understand.
> >>
> Yes, there is indeed a warning generated. I might not have expressed it 
> clearly enough. The issue below is related to the problem that occurs 
> when the second module is unloaded. When the first module was unloaded, 
> some nodes were left in the hash list, causing a use-after-free (UAF) 
> issue when traversing the hash list.
> Therefore, this patch aims to resolve the UAF problem caused by residual 
> nodes in the hash list after unloading a module while ftrace is disabled.

Yes, but I think your patch is redundant. Can you test the code
which I suggested at the last?

BTW, can you explain why that ftrace_disabled was kicked?
That usually means ftrace hits some bug.

> >>
> >>> BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: fffffbfff805000d
> >>> PGD 817fcc067 P4D 817fcc067 PUD 817fc8067 PMD 101555067 PTE 0
> >>> Oops: Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI
> >>> CPU: 4 UID: 0 PID: 2012 Comm: rmmod Tainted: G        W  OE
> >>> Tainted: [W]=WARN, [O]=OOT_MODULE, [E]=UNSIGNED_MODULE
> >>> RIP: 0010:kprobes_module_callback+0x89/0x790
> >>> RSP: 0018:ffff88812e157d30 EFLAGS: 00010a02
> >>> RAX: 1ffffffff805000d RBX: dffffc0000000000 RCX: ffffffff86a8de90
> >>> RDX: ffffed1025c2af9b RSI: 0000000000000008 RDI: ffffffffc0280068
> >>> RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: ffffed1025c2af9a
> >>> R10: ffff88812e157cd7 R11: 205d323130325420 R12: 0000000000000002
> >>> R13: ffffffffc0290488 R14: 0000000000000002 R15: ffffffffc0280040
> >>> FS:  00007fbc450dd740(0000) GS:ffff888420331000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> >>> CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> >>> CR2: fffffbfff805000d CR3: 000000010f624000 CR4: 00000000000006f0
> >>> Call Trace:
> >>>   <TASK>
> >>>   notifier_call_chain+0xc6/0x280
> >>>   blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x60/0x90
> >>>   __do_sys_delete_module.constprop.0+0x32a/0x4e0
> >>>   do_syscall_64+0x5d/0xfa0
> >>>   entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
> >>>
> >>> The above issue occurs because the kprobe was not removed from the hash
> >>> list after ftrace_disable.
> >>> To prevent the system from restarting unexpectedly after ftrace_disable,
> >>> in such cases, unregister_kprobe() ensures that the probe is removed from
> >>> the hash list, preventing subsequent access to already freed memory.
> >>>
> >>> Fixes: 6f0f1dd71953 ("kprobes: Cleanup disabling and unregistering path")
> >>> Signed-off-by: Ye Bin <yebin10@huawei.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>   kernel/kprobes.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >>>   1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c
> >>> index ab8f9fc1f0d1..d735a608b810 100644
> >>> --- a/kernel/kprobes.c
> >>> +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c
> >>> @@ -1731,8 +1731,30 @@ static int __unregister_kprobe_top(struct kprobe *p)
> >>>
> >>>   	/* Disable kprobe. This will disarm it if needed. */
> >>>   	ap = __disable_kprobe(p);
> >>> -	if (IS_ERR(ap))
> >>> -		return PTR_ERR(ap);
> >>> +	if (IS_ERR(ap)) {
> >>> +		int ret = PTR_ERR(ap);
> >>> +
> >>> +		/*
> >>> +		 * If ftrace disabled we need to delete kprobe node from
> >>> +		 * hlist or aggregation list. If nodes are not removed when
> >>> +		 * modules are removed, the already released nodes will
> >>> +		 * remain in the linked list. Subsequent access to the
> >>> +		 * linked list may then trigger exceptions.
> >>> +		 */
> >>> +		if (ret != -ENODEV)
> >>> +			return ret;
> >>> +
> >>> +		ap = __get_valid_kprobe(p);
> >>> +		if (!ap)
> >>> +			return ret;
> >>> +
> >>> +		if (ap == p)
> >>> +			hlist_del_rcu(&ap->hlist);
> >>> +		else
> >>> +			list_del_rcu(&p->list);
> >>
> >> Instead of repeating this process, we should ignore
> >> -ENODEV error from ftrace directly. BTW, ftrace_disabled is set
> >> when ftrace_kill() is called, that means ftrace is no more usable.
> >> So I think we can just ignore ftrace operation in
> >> __disarm_kprobe_ftrace().
> >
> > So, what we need is;
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c
> > index ab8f9fc1f0d1..17d451553389 100644
> > --- a/kernel/kprobes.c
> > +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c
> > @@ -1104,6 +1104,10 @@ static int __disarm_kprobe_ftrace(struct kprobe *p, struct ftrace_ops *ops,
> >   	int ret;
> >
> >   	lockdep_assert_held(&kprobe_mutex);
> > +	if (unlikely(kprobe_ftrace_disabled)) {
> > +		/* Now ftrace is disabled forever, disarm is already done. */
> > +		return 0;
> > +	}
> >
> >   	if (*cnt == 1) {
> >   		ret = unregister_ftrace_function(ops);
> >

This one, it should fix simply.

Thank you,

> >
> 


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>

Re: [PATCH] kprobes: avoid crash when rmmod/insmod modules after ftrace_disabled

[yebin]

On 2025/12/2 10:32, Masami Hiramatsu (Google) wrote:
> Cc: Steve,
>
> Since this is caused by ftrace_kill.
>
> On Fri, 28 Nov 2025 10:27:42 +0800
> yebin <yebin@huaweicloud.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 2025/11/27 12:18, Masami Hiramatsu (Google) wrote:
>>> On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 12:52:48 +0900
>>> Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for reporting!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 25 Nov 2025 10:05:36 +0800
>>>> Ye Bin <yebin@huaweicloud.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> From: Ye Bin <yebin10@huawei.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> There's a issue as follows when rmmod modules after ftrace disabled:
>>>>
>>>> You may see something like;
>>>>
>>>> Failed to unregister kprobe-ftrace (error -19)
>>>>
>>>> or
>>>>
>>>> Failed to disarm kprobe-ftrace at <function name> (error -19)
>>>>
>>>> right before this BUG, don't you?
>>>> If you reported with that line, it's more easier to understand.
>>>>
>> Yes, there is indeed a warning generated. I might not have expressed it
>> clearly enough. The issue below is related to the problem that occurs
>> when the second module is unloaded. When the first module was unloaded,
>> some nodes were left in the hash list, causing a use-after-free (UAF)
>> issue when traversing the hash list.
>> Therefore, this patch aims to resolve the UAF problem caused by residual
>> nodes in the hash list after unloading a module while ftrace is disabled.
>
> Yes, but I think your patch is redundant. Can you test the code
> which I suggested at the last?
>
Yes, indeed, your solution is simpler and doesn't require writing 
repetitive code.

> BTW, can you explain why that ftrace_disabled was kicked?
> That usually means ftrace hits some bug.
>
Yes, there is a conflict between two modules causing ftrace_disabled.
>>>>
>>>>> BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: fffffbfff805000d
>>>>> PGD 817fcc067 P4D 817fcc067 PUD 817fc8067 PMD 101555067 PTE 0
>>>>> Oops: Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI
>>>>> CPU: 4 UID: 0 PID: 2012 Comm: rmmod Tainted: G        W  OE
>>>>> Tainted: [W]=WARN, [O]=OOT_MODULE, [E]=UNSIGNED_MODULE
>>>>> RIP: 0010:kprobes_module_callback+0x89/0x790
>>>>> RSP: 0018:ffff88812e157d30 EFLAGS: 00010a02
>>>>> RAX: 1ffffffff805000d RBX: dffffc0000000000 RCX: ffffffff86a8de90
>>>>> RDX: ffffed1025c2af9b RSI: 0000000000000008 RDI: ffffffffc0280068
>>>>> RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: ffffed1025c2af9a
>>>>> R10: ffff88812e157cd7 R11: 205d323130325420 R12: 0000000000000002
>>>>> R13: ffffffffc0290488 R14: 0000000000000002 R15: ffffffffc0280040
>>>>> FS:  00007fbc450dd740(0000) GS:ffff888420331000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
>>>>> CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
>>>>> CR2: fffffbfff805000d CR3: 000000010f624000 CR4: 00000000000006f0
>>>>> Call Trace:
>>>>>    <TASK>
>>>>>    notifier_call_chain+0xc6/0x280
>>>>>    blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x60/0x90
>>>>>    __do_sys_delete_module.constprop.0+0x32a/0x4e0
>>>>>    do_syscall_64+0x5d/0xfa0
>>>>>    entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
>>>>>
>>>>> The above issue occurs because the kprobe was not removed from the hash
>>>>> list after ftrace_disable.
>>>>> To prevent the system from restarting unexpectedly after ftrace_disable,
>>>>> in such cases, unregister_kprobe() ensures that the probe is removed from
>>>>> the hash list, preventing subsequent access to already freed memory.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixes: 6f0f1dd71953 ("kprobes: Cleanup disabling and unregistering path")
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ye Bin <yebin10@huawei.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>    kernel/kprobes.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>>>    1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c
>>>>> index ab8f9fc1f0d1..d735a608b810 100644
>>>>> --- a/kernel/kprobes.c
>>>>> +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c
>>>>> @@ -1731,8 +1731,30 @@ static int __unregister_kprobe_top(struct kprobe *p)
>>>>>
>>>>>    	/* Disable kprobe. This will disarm it if needed. */
>>>>>    	ap = __disable_kprobe(p);
>>>>> -	if (IS_ERR(ap))
>>>>> -		return PTR_ERR(ap);
>>>>> +	if (IS_ERR(ap)) {
>>>>> +		int ret = PTR_ERR(ap);
>>>>> +
>>>>> +		/*
>>>>> +		 * If ftrace disabled we need to delete kprobe node from
>>>>> +		 * hlist or aggregation list. If nodes are not removed when
>>>>> +		 * modules are removed, the already released nodes will
>>>>> +		 * remain in the linked list. Subsequent access to the
>>>>> +		 * linked list may then trigger exceptions.
>>>>> +		 */
>>>>> +		if (ret != -ENODEV)
>>>>> +			return ret;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +		ap = __get_valid_kprobe(p);
>>>>> +		if (!ap)
>>>>> +			return ret;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +		if (ap == p)
>>>>> +			hlist_del_rcu(&ap->hlist);
>>>>> +		else
>>>>> +			list_del_rcu(&p->list);
>>>>
>>>> Instead of repeating this process, we should ignore
>>>> -ENODEV error from ftrace directly. BTW, ftrace_disabled is set
>>>> when ftrace_kill() is called, that means ftrace is no more usable.
>>>> So I think we can just ignore ftrace operation in
>>>> __disarm_kprobe_ftrace().
>>>
>>> So, what we need is;
>>>
>>> diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c
>>> index ab8f9fc1f0d1..17d451553389 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/kprobes.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c
>>> @@ -1104,6 +1104,10 @@ static int __disarm_kprobe_ftrace(struct kprobe *p, struct ftrace_ops *ops,
>>>    	int ret;
>>>
>>>    	lockdep_assert_held(&kprobe_mutex);
>>> +	if (unlikely(kprobe_ftrace_disabled)) {
>>> +		/* Now ftrace is disabled forever, disarm is already done. */
>>> +		return 0;
>>> +	}
>>>
>>>    	if (*cnt == 1) {
>>>    		ret = unregister_ftrace_function(ops);
>>>
>
> This one, it should fix simply.
>
I tested it and it can solve the problem. This is indeed a good solution 
that reuses the original code.
Do you want me to send a new patch version according to your proposal?
> Thank you,
>
>>>
>>
>
>

Re: [PATCH] kprobes: avoid crash when rmmod/insmod modules after ftrace_disabled

[Masami Hiramatsu]

On Wed, 3 Dec 2025 10:37:05 +0800
yebin <yebin@huaweicloud.com> wrote:

> >>> diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c
> >>> index ab8f9fc1f0d1..17d451553389 100644
> >>> --- a/kernel/kprobes.c
> >>> +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c
> >>> @@ -1104,6 +1104,10 @@ static int __disarm_kprobe_ftrace(struct kprobe *p, struct ftrace_ops *ops,
> >>>    	int ret;
> >>>
> >>>    	lockdep_assert_held(&kprobe_mutex);
> >>> +	if (unlikely(kprobe_ftrace_disabled)) {
> >>> +		/* Now ftrace is disabled forever, disarm is already done. */
> >>> +		return 0;
> >>> +	}
> >>>
> >>>    	if (*cnt == 1) {
> >>>    		ret = unregister_ftrace_function(ops);
> >>>
> >
> > This one, it should fix simply.
> >
> I tested it and it can solve the problem. This is indeed a good solution 
> that reuses the original code.
> Do you want me to send a new patch version according to your proposal?

OK, I'll send it with some tags which is required for this fix.
Please add your tested-by on that.

Thank you,

> > Thank you,
> >
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> 


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>

Re: [PATCH] kprobes: avoid crash when rmmod/insmod modules after ftrace_disabled

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 28 Nov 2025 10:27:42 +0800
yebin <yebin@huaweicloud.com> wrote:

> >> right before this BUG, don't you?
> >> If you reported with that line, it's more easier to understand.
> >>  
> Yes, there is indeed a warning generated. I might not have expressed it 
> clearly enough. The issue below is related to the problem that occurs 
> when the second module is unloaded. When the first module was unloaded, 
> some nodes were left in the hash list, causing a use-after-free (UAF) 
> issue when traversing the hash list.
> Therefore, this patch aims to resolve the UAF problem caused by residual 
> nodes in the hash list after unloading a module while ftrace is disabled.

ftrace_disabled is equivalent to BUG(). But it doesn't crash the system
immediately, but requires a reboot ASAP.

I'm not interested in fixing residual bugs that happen because of a
ftrace_disabled was triggered. The ftrace_disabled triggering is the cause
of this. It should *never* happen. If it does, it needs to be fixed.

Let's focus our attention on fixing the cause of ftrace_disabled. Anything
else is just waste of effort.

Do you have the output of the first warning when ftrace_disabled was
triggered?

-- Steve

Re: [PATCH] kprobes: avoid crash when rmmod/insmod modules after ftrace_disabled

[yebin]

On 2025/12/3 0:43, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Nov 2025 10:27:42 +0800
> yebin <yebin@huaweicloud.com> wrote:
>
>>>> right before this BUG, don't you?
>>>> If you reported with that line, it's more easier to understand.
>>>>
>> Yes, there is indeed a warning generated. I might not have expressed it
>> clearly enough. The issue below is related to the problem that occurs
>> when the second module is unloaded. When the first module was unloaded,
>> some nodes were left in the hash list, causing a use-after-free (UAF)
>> issue when traversing the hash list.
>> Therefore, this patch aims to resolve the UAF problem caused by residual
>> nodes in the hash list after unloading a module while ftrace is disabled.
>
> ftrace_disabled is equivalent to BUG(). But it doesn't crash the system
> immediately, but requires a reboot ASAP.
>
> I'm not interested in fixing residual bugs that happen because of a
> ftrace_disabled was triggered. The ftrace_disabled triggering is the cause
> of this. It should *never* happen. If it does, it needs to be fixed.
>
> Let's focus our attention on fixing the cause of ftrace_disabled. Anything
> else is just waste of effort.
>
> Do you have the output of the first warning when ftrace_disabled was
> triggered?

The reason for ftrace_disable is a conflict between a livepatch and a 
module. This issue must be resolved. However, since this problem occurs 
in the current network environment, it does not affect the normal 
operation of services, so customers may not necessarily be willing to 
restart their systems to fix it. The only thing that can be done is to 
implement proper exception protection to ensure the system can continue 
to function until the customer is willing to upgrade and restart.

  WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 2394 at kernel/trace/ftrace.c:2603 
ftrace_modify_all_code+0x81/0x140
  CPU: 0 PID: 2394 Comm: insmod Tainted: P           OE K
  RIP: 0010:ftrace_modify_all_code+0x81/0x140
  Call Trace:
   arch_ftrace_update_code+0xc/0x20
   ftrace_run_update_code+0x13/0x70
   ftrace_startup+0xc0/0x190
   register_ftrace_function+0x44/0x60
   arm_kprobe+0xc7/0x120
   register_kprobe+0x5f0/0x6a0
   kxxx_emerge_init+0x89/0xe0 [kxxx]
   kxxx_region_init+0x16d/0x330 [kxxx]
   kxxx_init+0xe3/0x1000 [kxxx]
   do_one_initcall+0x46/0x1c8
   do_init_module+0x5b/0x1fb
   load_module+0x15a7/0x1e20
   __do_sys_finit_module+0xe9/0x110
   do_syscall_64+0x5b/0x1b0
   entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x65/0xca
>
> -- Steve
>