From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753134Ab2L2Rga (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Dec 2012 12:36:30 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:9511 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752880Ab2L2Rg1 (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Dec 2012 12:36:27 -0500 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 18:36:14 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Srikar Dronamraju Cc: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli , Anton Arapov , Frank Eigler , Josh Stone , "Suzuki K. Poulose" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH 1/1] uprobes: Teach handler_chain() to filter out the probed task Message-ID: <20121229173614.GA2154@redhat.com> References: <20121229173554.GA2145@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20121229173554.GA2145@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Currrently the are 2 problems with pre-filtering: 1. It is not possible to add/remove a task (mm) after uprobe_register() 2. A forked child inherits all breakpoints and uprobe_consumer can not control this. This patch does the first step to improve the filtering. handler_chain() removes the breakpoints installed by this uprobe from current->mm if all handlers return UPROBE_HANDLER_REMOVE. Note that handler_chain() relies on ->register_rwsem to avoid the race with uprobe_register/unregister which can add/del a consumer, or even remove and then insert the new uprobe at the same address. Perhaps we will add uprobe_apply_mm(uprobe, mm, is_register) and teach copy_mm() to do filter(UPROBE_FILTER_FORK), but I think this change makes sense anyway. Note: instead of checking the retcode from uc->handler, we could add uc->filter(UPROBE_FILTER_BPHIT). But I think this is not optimal to call 2 hooks in a row. This buys nothing, and if handler/filter do something nontrivial they will probably do the same work twice. Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov --- include/linux/uprobes.h | 3 ++ kernel/events/uprobes.c | 58 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------- 2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/uprobes.h b/include/linux/uprobes.h index c2df693..95d0002 100644 --- a/include/linux/uprobes.h +++ b/include/linux/uprobes.h @@ -35,6 +35,9 @@ struct inode; # include #endif +#define UPROBE_HANDLER_REMOVE 1 +#define UPROBE_HANDLER_MASK 1 + enum uprobe_filter_ctx { UPROBE_FILTER_REGISTER, UPROBE_FILTER_UNREGISTER, diff --git a/kernel/events/uprobes.c b/kernel/events/uprobes.c index e2ebb6f..59b6e97 100644 --- a/kernel/events/uprobes.c +++ b/kernel/events/uprobes.c @@ -440,16 +440,6 @@ static struct uprobe *alloc_uprobe(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset) return uprobe; } -static void handler_chain(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct pt_regs *regs) -{ - struct uprobe_consumer *uc; - - down_read(&uprobe->register_rwsem); - for (uc = uprobe->consumers; uc; uc = uc->next) - uc->handler(uc, regs); - up_read(&uprobe->register_rwsem); -} - static void consumer_add(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc) { down_write(&uprobe->consumer_rwsem); @@ -882,6 +872,33 @@ void uprobe_unregister(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset, struct uprobe_consume put_uprobe(uprobe); } +static int unapply_uprobe(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct mm_struct *mm) +{ + struct vm_area_struct *vma; + int err = 0; + + down_read(&mm->mmap_sem); + for (vma = mm->mmap; vma; vma = vma->vm_next) { + unsigned long vaddr; + loff_t offset; + + if (!valid_vma(vma, false) || + vma->vm_file->f_mapping->host != uprobe->inode) + continue; + + offset = (loff_t)vma->vm_pgoff << PAGE_SHIFT; + if (uprobe->offset < offset || + uprobe->offset >= offset + vma->vm_end - vma->vm_start) + continue; + + vaddr = offset_to_vaddr(vma, uprobe->offset); + err |= remove_breakpoint(uprobe, mm, vaddr); + } + up_read(&mm->mmap_sem); + + return err; +} + static struct rb_node * find_node_in_range(struct inode *inode, loff_t min, loff_t max) { @@ -1435,6 +1452,27 @@ static struct uprobe *find_active_uprobe(unsigned long bp_vaddr, int *is_swbp) return uprobe; } +static void handler_chain(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct pt_regs *regs) +{ + struct uprobe_consumer *uc; + int remove = UPROBE_HANDLER_REMOVE; + + down_read(&uprobe->register_rwsem); + for (uc = uprobe->consumers; uc; uc = uc->next) { + int rc = uc->handler(uc, regs); + + WARN(rc & ~UPROBE_HANDLER_MASK, + "bad rc=0x%x from %pf()\n", rc, uc->handler); + remove &= rc; + } + + if (remove && uprobe->consumers) { + WARN_ON(!uprobe_is_active(uprobe)); + unapply_uprobe(uprobe, current->mm); + } + up_read(&uprobe->register_rwsem); +} + /* * Run handler and ask thread to singlestep. * Ensure all non-fatal signals cannot interrupt thread while it singlesteps. -- 1.5.5.1