lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Aug]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH -tip v14 03/12] kprobes: checks probe address is instruction boudary on x86
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 04:34:28PM -0400, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Ensure safeness of inserting kprobes by checking whether the specified
> address is at the first byte of a instruction on x86.
> This is done by decoding probed function from its head to the probe point.
>
> Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com>
> Acked-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com>
> Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
> Cc: Frank Ch. Eigler <fche@redhat.com>
> Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
> Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
> Cc: Jason Baron <jbaron@redhat.com>
> Cc: Jim Keniston <jkenisto@us.ibm.com>
> Cc: K.Prasad <prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
> Cc: Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>
> Cc: Przemysław Pawełczyk <przemyslaw@pawelczyk.it>
> Cc: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
> Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
> Cc: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> Cc: Tom Zanussi <tzanussi@gmail.com>
> Cc: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>
> ---
>
> arch/x86/kernel/kprobes.c | 69 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes.c b/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes.c
> index b5b1848..80d493f 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/kprobes.c
> @@ -48,6 +48,7 @@
> #include <linux/preempt.h>
> #include <linux/module.h>
> #include <linux/kdebug.h>
> +#include <linux/kallsyms.h>
>
> #include <asm/cacheflush.h>
> #include <asm/desc.h>
> @@ -55,6 +56,7 @@
> #include <asm/uaccess.h>
> #include <asm/alternative.h>
> #include <asm/debugreg.h>
> +#include <asm/insn.h>
>
> void jprobe_return_end(void);
>
> @@ -245,6 +247,71 @@ retry:
> }
> }
>
> +/* Recover the probed instruction at addr for further analysis. */
> +static int recover_probed_instruction(kprobe_opcode_t *buf, unsigned long addr)
> +{
> + struct kprobe *kp;
> + kp = get_kprobe((void *)addr);
> + if (!kp)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + /*
> + * Basically, kp->ainsn.insn has an original instruction.
> + * However, RIP-relative instruction can not do single-stepping
> + * at different place, fix_riprel() tweaks the displacement of
> + * that instruction. In that case, we can't recover the instruction
> + * from the kp->ainsn.insn.
> + *
> + * On the other hand, kp->opcode has a copy of the first byte of
> + * the probed instruction, which is overwritten by int3. And
> + * the instruction at kp->addr is not modified by kprobes except
> + * for the first byte, we can recover the original instruction
> + * from it and kp->opcode.
> + */
> + memcpy(buf, kp->addr, MAX_INSN_SIZE * sizeof(kprobe_opcode_t));
> + buf[0] = kp->opcode;
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +/* Dummy buffers for kallsyms_lookup */
> +static char __dummy_buf[KSYM_NAME_LEN];
> +
> +/* Check if paddr is at an instruction boundary */
> +static int __kprobes can_probe(unsigned long paddr)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + unsigned long addr, offset = 0;
> + struct insn insn;
> + kprobe_opcode_t buf[MAX_INSN_SIZE];
> +
> + if (!kallsyms_lookup(paddr, NULL, &offset, NULL, __dummy_buf))
> + return 0;
> +
> + /* Decode instructions */
> + addr = paddr - offset;
> + while (addr < paddr) {
> + kernel_insn_init(&insn, (void *)addr);
> + insn_get_opcode(&insn);
> +
> + /* Check if the instruction has been modified. */
> + if (insn.opcode.bytes[0] == BREAKPOINT_INSTRUCTION) {
> + ret = recover_probed_instruction(buf, addr);



I'm confused about the reason of this recovering. Is it to remove
kprobes behind the current setting one in the current function?

If such cleanup is needed for whatever reason, I wonder what happens
to the corresponding kprobe structure, why isn't it using the arch_disarm_
helper to patch back?

(Questions that may prove my solid misunderstanding of the kprobes code ;-)

Frederic.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-08-19 01:07    [W:0.187 / U:0.772 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site