From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1755449AbdKNPve (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 14 Nov 2017 10:51:34 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:46934 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1754699AbdKNPv1 (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 14 Nov 2017 10:51:27 -0500
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 16:51:24 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        ast@fb.com, kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH][v3] uprobes/x86: emulate push insns for uprobe on x86
Message-ID: <20171114155124.GB17667@redhat.com>
References: <20171113221139.1516536-1-yhs@fb.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20171113221139.1516536-1-yhs@fb.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.25]); Tue, 14 Nov 2017 15:51:27 +0000 (UTC)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 11/13, Yonghong Song wrote:
>
> +static int push_setup_xol_ops(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct insn *insn)
> +{
> +	u8 opc1 = OPCODE1(insn), reg_offset = 0;
> +
> +	if (opc1 < 0x50 || opc1 > 0x57)
> +		return -ENOSYS;
> +
> +	if (insn->length > 2)
> +		return -ENOSYS;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> +	if (test_thread_flag(TIF_ADDR32))
> +		return -ENOSYS;
> +#endif

No, this doesn't look right, see my previous email. You should do this
check in the "if (insn->length == 2)" branch below, "push bp" should be
emulated correctly.

And test_thread_flag(TIF_ADDR32) is not right too. The caller is not
necessarily the probed task. See is_64bit_mm(mm) in arch_uprobe_analyze_insn().

And again... please check if uprobe_init_insn() fails or not in this case
(32bit task does, say, "push r8"). If it fails, your V2 should be fine.


To remind, uprobes && 32-bit is broken, let me quote my another email:

	The 3rd bug means that you simply can't uprobe a 32bit task on a 64bit
	system, the in_compat_syscall() logic in get_unmapped_area() looks very
	wrong although I need to re-check.

I didn't have time for this problem so far. But emulation should work, so
you can hopefully test your patch.

Oleg.