From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
live-patching@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3.1 09/10] x86/unwind: add ORC unwinder
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 16:16:25 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170720211625.2uebcyyxfceenzw6@treble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ea6d5215-8d43-1696-09e8-b42fd82a45cf@suse.cz>
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 09:12:16AM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 07/14/2017, 07:22 PM, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > +void __unwind_start(struct unwind_state *state, struct task_struct *task,
> > + struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long *first_frame)
> > +{
> > + memset(state, 0, sizeof(*state));
> > + state->task = task;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Refuse to unwind the stack of a task while it's executing on another
> > + * CPU. This check is racy, but that's ok: the unwinder has other
> > + * checks to prevent it from going off the rails.
> > + */
> > + if (task_on_another_cpu(task))
> > + goto done;
> > +
> > + if (regs) {
> > + if (user_mode(regs))
> > + goto done;
> > +
> > + state->ip = regs->ip;
> > + state->sp = kernel_stack_pointer(regs);
> > + state->bp = regs->bp;
> > + state->regs = regs;
> > + state->full_regs = true;
> > + state->signal = true;
> > +
> > + } else if (task == current) {
> > + asm volatile("lea (%%rip), %0\n\t"
> > + "mov %%rsp, %1\n\t"
> > + "mov %%rbp, %2\n\t"
> > + : "=r" (state->ip), "=r" (state->sp),
> > + "=r" (state->bp));
> > +
> > + } else {
> > + struct inactive_task_frame *frame = (void *)task->thread.sp;
> > +
> > + state->ip = frame->ret_addr;
> > + state->sp = task->thread.sp;
> > + state->bp = frame->bp;
>
> I wonder, if the reads from 'frame' should have READ_ONCE_NOCHECK for
> the same reason as in:
> commit 84936118bdf37bda513d4a361c38181a216427e0
> Author: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
> Date: Mon Jan 9 12:00:23 2017 -0600
>
> x86/unwind: Disable KASAN checks for non-current tasks
> ?
Yeah, maybe so. Since the task_on_another_cpu() check above is racy,
here it's remotely possible that the task has since starting executing
and has poisoned the stack memory we're about to read.
I don't know how realistic that scenario is, but it wouldn't hurt to add
a couple of READ_ONCE_NOCHECKs here for the 'frame' dereferences.
--
Josh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-20 21:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-11 15:33 [PATCH v3 00/10] x86: ORC unwinder (previously undwarf) Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-11 15:33 ` [PATCH v3 01/10] x86/entry/64: Refactor IRQ stacks and make them NMI-safe Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-18 10:40 ` [tip:x86/asm] " tip-bot for Andy Lutomirski
2017-07-11 15:33 ` [PATCH v3 02/10] x86/entry/64: Initialize the top of the IRQ stack before switching stacks Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-18 10:41 ` [tip:x86/asm] " tip-bot for Andy Lutomirski
2017-07-11 15:33 ` [PATCH v3 03/10] x86/dumpstack: fix occasionally missing registers Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-18 10:41 ` [tip:x86/asm] x86/dumpstack: Fix " tip-bot for Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-11 15:33 ` [PATCH v3 04/10] x86/dumpstack: fix interrupt and exception stack boundary checks Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-18 10:42 ` [tip:x86/asm] x86/dumpstack: Fix " tip-bot for Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-11 15:33 ` [PATCH v3 05/10] objtool: add ORC unwind table generation Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-18 10:42 ` [tip:x86/asm] objtool: Add " tip-bot for Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-11 15:33 ` [PATCH v3 06/10] objtool, x86: add facility for asm code to provide unwind hints Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-18 10:43 ` [tip:x86/asm] objtool, x86: Add " tip-bot for Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-11 15:33 ` [PATCH v3 07/10] x86/entry/64: add unwind hint annotations Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-18 10:43 ` [tip:x86/asm] x86/entry/64: Add " tip-bot for Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-11 15:33 ` [PATCH v3 08/10] x86/asm: add unwind hint annotations to sync_core() Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-18 10:43 ` [tip:x86/asm] x86/asm: Add " tip-bot for Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-11 15:33 ` [PATCH v3 09/10] x86/unwind: add ORC unwinder Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-14 17:22 ` [PATCH v3.1 " Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-20 7:12 ` Jiri Slaby
2017-07-20 21:16 ` Josh Poimboeuf [this message]
2017-07-11 15:33 ` [PATCH v3 10/10] x86/kconfig: make it easier to switch to the new " Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-12 8:27 ` [PATCH v3 00/10] x86: ORC unwinder (previously undwarf) Ingo Molnar
2017-07-12 14:42 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-12 19:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-07-14 17:17 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-25 9:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-07-25 17:58 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-25 18:46 ` Kees Cook
2017-07-12 21:49 ` Andres Freund
2017-07-12 22:32 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-12 22:36 ` Andres Freund
2017-07-12 22:40 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-12 22:54 ` Andres Freund
2017-07-13 7:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-13 8:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-13 8:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-13 9:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-07-13 12:17 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-13 12:21 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-13 12:35 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-14 8:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-07-14 8:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-07-25 11:55 ` [RFC] perf: Delayed userspace unwind (Was: [PATCH v3 00/10] x86: ORC unwinder) Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-28 14:13 ` Jiri Olsa
2017-07-28 14:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-29 3:35 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-07-29 9:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-12 22:30 ` [PATCH v3 00/10] x86: ORC unwinder (previously undwarf) Andi Kleen
2017-07-12 22:47 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-13 4:29 ` Andi Kleen
2017-07-13 13:15 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-13 9:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-07-12 23:22 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-07-13 3:03 ` Mike Galbraith
2017-07-13 4:15 ` Andi Kleen
2017-07-13 4:28 ` Mike Galbraith
2017-07-13 4:40 ` Andi Kleen
2017-07-13 5:22 ` Mike Galbraith
2017-07-13 12:02 ` Jiri Kosina
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=20170720211625.2uebcyyxfceenzw6@treble \
--to=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jslaby@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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