lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Oct]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/2] kprobes: improve error handling when arming/disarming kprobes
Masami,

Can you review these patches?

-- Steve


On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 21:14:12 +0200
Jessica Yu <jeyu@kernel.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> This patchset attempts to improve error handling when arming or disarming
> ftrace-based kprobes. The current behavior is to simply WARN when ftrace
> (un-)registration fails, without propagating the error code. This can lead
> to confusing situations where, for example, register_kprobe()/enable_kprobe()
> would return 0 indicating success even if arming via ftrace had failed. In
> this scenario we'd end up with a non-functioning kprobe even though kprobe
> registration (or enablement) returned success. In this patchset, we take
> errors from ftrace into account and propagate the error when we cannot arm
> or disarm a kprobe.
>
> Below is an example that illustrates the problem using livepatch and
> systemtap (which uses kprobes underneath). Both livepatch and kprobes use
> ftrace ops with the IPMODIFY flag set, so registration at the same
> function entry is limited to only one ftrace user.
>
> Before
> ------
> # modprobe livepatch-sample # patches cmdline_proc_show, ftrace ops has IPMODIFY set
> # stap -e 'probe kernel.function("cmdline_proc_show").call { printf ("cmdline_proc_show\n"); }'
>
> .. (nothing prints after reading /proc/cmdline) ..
>
> The systemtap handler doesn't execute due to a kprobe arming failure caused
> by a ftrace IPMODIFY conflict with livepatch, and there isn't an obvious
> indication of error from systemtap (because register_kprobe() returned
> success) unless the user inspects dmesg.
>
> After
> -----
> # modprobe livepatch-sample
> # stap -e 'probe kernel.function("cmdline_proc_show").call { printf ("cmdline_proc_show\n"); }'
> WARNING: probe kernel.function("cmdline_proc_show@/home/jeyu/work/linux-next/fs/proc/cmdline.c:6").call (address 0xffffffffa82fe910) registration error (rc -16)
>
> Although the systemtap handler doesn't execute (as it shouldn't), the
> ftrace error is propagated and now systemtap prints a visible error message
> stating that (kprobe) registration had failed (because register_kprobe()
> returned an error), along with the propagated error code.
>
> This patchset was based on Petr Mladek's original patchset (patches 2 and 3)
> back in 2015, which improved kprobes error handling, found here:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/26/452
>
> However, further work on this had been paused since then and the patches
> were not upstreamed.
>
> This patchset has been lightly sanity-tested (on linux-next) with kprobes,
> kretprobes, jprobes, and optimized kprobes. It passes the kprobes smoke
> test, but more testing is greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jessica
>
> ---
> Jessica Yu (2):
> kprobes: propagate error from arm_kprobe_ftrace()
> kprobes: propagate error from disarm_kprobe_ftrace()
>
> kernel/kprobes.c | 163 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
> 1 file changed, 112 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-)
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-10-04 21:45    [W:0.050 / U:2.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site