From: Andrey Grodzovsky <andrey.grodzovsky@crowdstrike.com>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: "kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com" <kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com>,
"live-patching@vger.kernel.org" <live-patching@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: Question - Livepatch/Kprobe Coexistence on Ftrace-enabled Functions (Ubuntu kernel based on Linux stable 5.15.30)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2025 17:11:31 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <eb176565-6e13-4f98-8c9a-cacf7fc42f3a@crowdstrike.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aO-LMaY-os44cEJP@pathway.suse.cz>
On 10/15/25 07:53, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Tue 2025-10-14 21:37:49, Andrey Grodzovsky wrote:
>> Dear Upstream Livepatch team and Ubuntu Kernel team - I included you both in this since the issue lies on the boundary between Ubuntu kernel and upstream.
>>
>> According to official kernel documentation - https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://docs.kernel.org/livepatch/livepatch.html*livepatch__;Iw!!BmdzS3_lV9HdKG8!z3Y4vlE7RcCriT3z4Hg7cVaojZPN-ysQTbjDJVXyO_MoRRlkKsymUTDP4PGvvPaV0TDVYhziOYMm9WnUGu5TeFxUxQ$ , section 7, Limitations -
>> 1 - Kretprobes using the ftrace framework conflict with the patched functions.
>> 2 - Kprobes in the original function are ignored when the code is redirected to the new implementation.
>>
>> Yet, when testing on my Ubuntu 5.15.0-1005.7-aws (based on 5.15.30 stable kernel) machine, I have no problem applying Livepatch and then setting krpobes and kretprobes on a patched function using bpftrace (or directly by coding a BPF program with kprobe/kretprobe attachment)and can confirm both execute without issues. Also the opposite works fine, running my krpobe and kretprobe hooks doesn't prevent from livepatch to be applied successfully.
>>
>> fentry/fexit probes do fail in in both directions - but this is expected according to my understanding as coexistence of livepatching and ftrace based BPF hooks are mutually exclusive until 6.0 based kernels
>>
>> libbpf: prog 'begin_new_exec_fentry': failed to attach: Device or resource busy
>> libbpf: prog 'begin_new_exec_fentry': failed to auto-attach: -16
>>
>>
>> Please help me understand this contradiction about kprobes - is this because the KPROBES are FTRACE based or any other reason ?
> Heh, it seems that we have discussed this 10 years ago and I already
> forgot most details.
>
> Yes, the conflict is detected when KPROBES are using FTRACE
> infrastructure. But it happens only when the KPROBE needs to redirect
> the function call, namely when it needs to modify IP address which will be used
> when all attached ftrace callbacks are proceed.
>
> It is related to the FTRACE_OPS_FL_IPMODIFY flag.
I see, that explains my case as my probes are simple, print only probes
that defently don't that the ip pointer.
But i still don't understand limitation 2 above doesn't show itself -
how my kprobes and especially kretprobes, continue execute even after
livepatch applied to the function i am attached to ? The code execution
is redirected to a different function then to which i attached my probes...
Also - can you please confirm that as far as i checked, starting with
kernel 6.0 fentry/fexit on x86 should not have any conflicts with
livepatch per merge of this RFC -
https://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/2207.2/00858.html ?
Thanks,
Andrey
>
> More details can be found in the discussion at
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/all/20141121102516.11844.27829.stgit@localhost.localdomain/T/*re746846b6b16c49a55c89b4c63b7995fe5972111__;Iw!!BmdzS3_lV9HdKG8!z3Y4vlE7RcCriT3z4Hg7cVaojZPN-ysQTbjDJVXyO_MoRRlkKsymUTDP4PGvvPaV0TDVYhziOYMm9WnUGu6pjuIgig$
>
> I seems that I made some analyze when it worked and it did not work,
> see https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/all/20141121102516.11844.27829.stgit@localhost.localdomain/T/*mffd8c8bf4325b473d89876f2805f42f1af7c82d7__;Iw!!BmdzS3_lV9HdKG8!z3Y4vlE7RcCriT3z4Hg7cVaojZPN-ysQTbjDJVXyO_MoRRlkKsymUTDP4PGvvPaV0TDVYhziOYMm9WnUGu5xbeoulA$
> But I am not 100% sure that it was correct. Also it was before the
> BPF-boom.
>
> Also you might look at the selftest in the todays Linus' tree:
>
> + tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://test-kprobe.sh__;!!BmdzS3_lV9HdKG8!z3Y4vlE7RcCriT3z4Hg7cVaojZPN-ysQTbjDJVXyO_MoRRlkKsymUTDP4PGvvPaV0TDVYhziOYMm9WnUGu5RXF-AnA$
> + tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/test_modules/test_klp_kprobe.c
> + tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/test_modules/test_klp_livepatch.c
>
> The parallel load fails when the Kprobe is using a post_handler.
>
> Sigh, we should fix the livepatch documentation. The kretprobes
> obviously work. register_kretprobe() even explicitely sets:
>
> rp->kp.post_handler = NULL;
>
> It seems that .post_handler is called after all ftrace handlers.
> And it sets IP after the NOPs, see kprobe_ftrace_handler().
> I am not sure about the use case.
>
> Best Regards,
> Petr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-15 21:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-14 21:37 Question - Livepatch/Kprobe Coexistence on Ftrace-enabled Functions (Ubuntu kernel based on Linux stable 5.15.30) Andrey Grodzovsky
2025-10-15 11:53 ` Petr Mladek
2025-10-15 21:11 ` Andrey Grodzovsky [this message]
2025-10-16 10:56 ` [External] " Petr Mladek
2025-10-16 21:32 ` Song Liu
2025-10-16 21:55 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2025-10-17 16:58 ` Song Liu
2025-10-17 19:07 ` Song Liu
2025-10-17 19:48 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2025-10-17 21:11 ` Song Liu
2025-10-20 14:56 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2025-10-20 16:03 ` Song Liu
2025-10-20 16:45 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2025-10-20 18:53 ` Song Liu
2025-10-20 19:10 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2025-10-20 19:44 ` Song Liu
2025-10-20 19:53 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2025-10-20 21:31 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2025-10-21 6:07 ` Song Liu
2025-10-21 14:09 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-10-21 16:06 ` Song Liu
2025-10-21 14:15 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2025-10-21 16:08 ` Song Liu
2025-10-20 20:31 ` Steven Rostedt
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=eb176565-6e13-4f98-8c9a-cacf7fc42f3a@crowdstrike.com \
--to=andrey.grodzovsky@crowdstrike.com \
--cc=kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com \
--cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pmladek@suse.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