From: Amit Machhiwal <amachhiw@linux.ibm.com>
To: "Mukesh Kumar Chaurasiya (IBM)" <mkchauras@gmail.com>
Cc: maddy@linux.ibm.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au, npiggin@gmail.com,
chleroy@kernel.org, mkchauras@linux.ibm.com,
sshegde@linux.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/ptrace: Add offsetof check for exit_flags in pt_regs_check()
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2026 14:25:47 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260703134456.2d291388-8b-amachhiw@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260703074948.1668744-1-mkchauras@gmail.com>
On 2026/07/03 01:19 PM, Mukesh Kumar Chaurasiya (IBM) wrote:
> pt_regs_check() verifies that fields shared between struct pt_regs and
> struct user_pt_regs sit at the same offset, to catch any accidental
> layout divergence between the kernel and uapi structures.
>
> Add the missing check for exit_flags, following the same pattern as the
> existing checks for result, dsisr, dar and the other shared fields.
>
> Fixes: d7a6797e0bc1 ("powerpc: add exit_flags field in pt_regs")
You may want to add below in order to get this patch backported:
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Mukesh Kumar Chaurasiya (IBM) <mkchauras@gmail.com>
> ---
> arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace/ptrace.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace/ptrace.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace/ptrace.c
> index 316d4f5ead8e..fb3fec73f66a 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace/ptrace.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace/ptrace.c
> @@ -235,6 +235,8 @@ void __init pt_regs_check(void)
> offsetof(struct user_pt_regs, dsisr));
> BUILD_BUG_ON(offsetof(struct pt_regs, result) !=
> offsetof(struct user_pt_regs, result));
> + BUILD_BUG_ON(offsetof(struct pt_regs, exit_flags) !=
> + offsetof(struct user_pt_regs, exit_flags));
At first, it appeared to be redundant as we already check
CHECK_REG(PT_EXIT_FLAGS, exit_flags);
which expands to:
#define CHECK_REG(_pt, _reg) \
BUILD_BUG_ON(_pt != (offsetof(struct user_pt_regs, _reg) / \
sizeof(unsigned long)));
But looking closely, it turns out to be non-redundant. CHECK_REG only
touches struct user_pt_regs — it validates the PT_EXIT_FLAGS constant
against the uapi layout. It says nothing about struct pt_regs.
struct pt_regs (asm/ptrace.h) embeds struct user_pt_regs in a union
alongside an anonymous struct that re-declares all the same fields with
kernel-internal aliases (dear/dar, esr/dsisr). exit_flags lives in that
anonymous struct. A field accidentally inserted there between result and
exit_flags would silently break the union aliasing without CHECK_REG
catching it. The new BUILD_BUG_ON closes that gap, consistent with how
result, dar and dsisr are already protected in the same block.
Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Amit Machhiwal <amachhiw@linux.ibm.com>
Thanks,
Amit
>
> BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(struct user_pt_regs) > sizeof(struct pt_regs));
>
> --
> 2.55.0
>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-03 8:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-03 7:49 [PATCH] powerpc/ptrace: Add offsetof check for exit_flags in pt_regs_check() Mukesh Kumar Chaurasiya (IBM)
2026-07-03 8:55 ` Amit Machhiwal [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=20260703134456.2d291388-8b-amachhiw@linux.ibm.com \
--to=amachhiw@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=chleroy@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=mkchauras@gmail.com \
--cc=mkchauras@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=sshegde@linux.ibm.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