From: "Vamsi Krishna S ." <vamsi@in.ibm.com>
To: Rusty Lynch <rusty@linux.co.intel.com>
Cc: rddunlap@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
dprobes <dprobes@www-124.southbury.usf.ibm.com>,
richard <richardj_moore@uk.ibm.com>, tom <hanrahat@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]kprobes sample driver
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 13:24:21 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021113132421.A3171@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200211130518.gAD5ILf12898@linux.intel.com>; from rusty@linux.co.intel.com on Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 09:18:21PM -0800
Hi,
This is very nice. In fact, I will probably start using this for
testing kprobes myself. I have a few comments, given below inline.
Thank you,
Vamsi.
PS: I am cc'ing dprobes mailing list for folks who hang out there
to have a chance to take a look at this and may be comment/use.
Hope you don't mind.
--
Vamsi Krishna S.
Linux Technology Center,
IBM Software Lab, Bangalore.
Ph: +91 80 5044959
Internet: vamsi@in.ibm.com
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 09:18:21PM -0800, Rusty Lynch wrote:
> This is a sample kprobes module that implements a simple misc char device
> that can cause arbitrary text to be printk'ed when arbitrary kernel
> addresses are executed.
>
Nice idea.
> +static struct list_head probe_list;
> +struct nprobe {
> + struct list_head list;
> + struct kprobe probe;
> + char message[MAX_MSG_SIZE + 1];
> +};
> +
Good. This is how I meant struct kprobe to be used: as a part of
a bigger structure that the caller uses to manage probes.
> +static void noisy_pre_handler(struct kprobe *p, struct pt_regs *r)
> +{
> + struct list_head *tmp;
> +
> + printk(KERN_CRIT "noisy: noisy_prehandler\n");
> + list_for_each(tmp, &probe_list) {
> + struct nprobe *c = list_entry(tmp, struct nprobe, list);
> + if (&(c->probe) == p) {
> + printk(KERN_CRIT "%s\n", c->message);
> + }
> + }
> +}
Actually, you can do this in a much easier way without having to
loop through all probes. All you need is:
static void noisy_pre_handler(struct kprobe *p, struct pt_regs *r)
{
struct nprobe *c = container_of(p, struct nprobe, probe);
printk(KERN_CRIT "%s: %s\n", __FUNCTION__, c->message);
}
> +static ssize_t noisy_read(struct file *file, char *buf,
> + size_t count, loff_t *ppos)
> +{
> + struct list_head *tmp;
> +
> + printk(KERN_CRIT "noisy: noisy_read\n");
> + list_for_each(tmp, &probe_list) {
> + struct nprobe *p = list_entry(tmp, struct nprobe, list);
You could have used list_for_each_entry as:
struct nprobe *p;
list_for_each_entry(p, &probe_list, list) {
...
}
> +static ssize_t noisy_write(struct file *file, const char *buf, size_t count,
> + loff_t *ppos)
> +{
> + struct nprobe *n = 0;
> + size_t ret = -ENOMEM;
> + char *tmp = 0;
> +
> + printk(KERN_CRIT "noisy: noisy_write\n");
> + if (count > MAX_MSG_SIZE) {
> + printk(KERN_CRIT
> + "noisy: Input buffer (%i bytes) is too big!\n",
> + count);
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + tmp = (char *)kmalloc(count + 1, GFP_KERNEL);
Don't bother casting the return values from kmalloc. It is not needed.
Same for all other kmalloc calls here.
> + if (!tmp) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + n = (struct nprobe *)kmalloc(sizeof(struct nprobe), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!n) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto out;
> + }
> + memset(n, '\0', sizeof(struct nprobe));
> +
> + if (copy_from_user((void *)tmp, (void *)buf, count)) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto out;
> + }
> + tmp[count] = '\0';
> +
> + n = (struct nprobe *)kmalloc(sizeof(struct nprobe), GFP_KERNEL);
This is a duplicate call, kill it. You have already alloc'ed n above.
> + if (!n) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + if (2 != sscanf(tmp, "0x%x %s", &(n->probe).addr, n->message)) {
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + goto out;
> + }
> + (n->probe).pre_handler = noisy_pre_handler;
> + (n->probe).post_handler = noisy_post_handler;
> + (n->probe).fault_handler = noisy_fault_handler;
> +
> + {
> + /*
> + * I am attempting to verify that the kernel-mode address
> + * passed in is valid, but I suspect this is not the
> + * right way of doing this.
> + *
> + * Although, it appears to work. I can attempt to setup
> + * a probe for 0xfffffff0, and the write operation fails with
> + * -EINVAL.
> + */
> + unsigned short eip;
> + if (__get_user(eip, (unsigned short *)(n->probe).addr)) {
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + goto out;
> + }
> + }
This is not quite right. I will reply to your other post on how to
improve this check.
> +
> + if (register_kprobe(&(n->probe))) {
> + printk(KERN_CRIT "Unable to register probe at %p\n",
> + (n->probe).addr);
> + if (n)
> + kfree(n);
kfree(NULL) is valid. No need for if (n). Same comment for kfree(tmp);
prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-11-13 7:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-11-13 5:18 [PATCH]kprobes sample driver Rusty Lynch
2002-11-13 7:54 ` Vamsi Krishna S . [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=20021113132421.A3171@in.ibm.com \
--to=vamsi@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dprobes@www-124.southbury.usf.ibm.com \
--cc=hanrahat@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rddunlap@osdl.org \
--cc=richardj_moore@uk.ibm.com \
--cc=rusty@linux.co.intel.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