Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190122155724.27557-1-joe.lawrence@redhat.com>
 <20190122155724.27557-2-joe.lawrence@redhat.com> <20190202011455.GN26056@350D>
 <CAKTCnzmWCxPRSBdc8T_phtmoBftNZLV3BdFp3Dee5Lc8VGzFYg@mail.gmail.com> <87bm3qmqak.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
In-Reply-To: <87bm3qmqak.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
From:   Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 6 Feb 2019 13:48:11 +1100
Message-ID: <CAKTCnznr9MoL=eZsNWyGkKYdx7UbLQr86VL=xmC8h2ig8Sw+RQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] powerpc/64s: Clear on-stack exception marker upon
 exception return
To:     Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc:     Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:LINUX FOR POWERPC (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" 
        <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>, live-patching@vger.kernel.org,
        Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        Nicolai Stange <nstange@suse.de>, Torsten Duwe <duwe@lst.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 10:24 PM Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wrote:
>
> Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 12:14 PM Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 10:57:21AM -0500, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> >> > From: Nicolai Stange <nstange@suse.de>
> >> >
> >> > The ppc64 specific implementation of the reliable stacktracer,
> >> > save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable(), bails out and reports an "unreliable
> >> > trace" whenever it finds an exception frame on the stack. Stack frames
> >> > are classified as exception frames if the STACK_FRAME_REGS_MARKER magic,
> >> > as written by exception prologues, is found at a particular location.
> >> >
> >> > However, as observed by Joe Lawrence, it is possible in practice that
> >> > non-exception stack frames can alias with prior exception frames and thus,
> >> > that the reliable stacktracer can find a stale STACK_FRAME_REGS_MARKER on
> >> > the stack. It in turn falsely reports an unreliable stacktrace and blocks
> >> > any live patching transition to finish. Said condition lasts until the
> >> > stack frame is overwritten/initialized by function call or other means.
> >> >
> >> > In principle, we could mitigate this by making the exception frame
> >> > classification condition in save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable() stronger:
> >> > in addition to testing for STACK_FRAME_REGS_MARKER, we could also take into
> >> > account that for all exceptions executing on the kernel stack
> >> > - their stack frames's backlink pointers always match what is saved
> >> >   in their pt_regs instance's ->gpr[1] slot and that
> >> > - their exception frame size equals STACK_INT_FRAME_SIZE, a value
> >> >   uncommonly large for non-exception frames.
> >> >
> >> > However, while these are currently true, relying on them would make the
> >> > reliable stacktrace implementation more sensitive towards future changes in
> >> > the exception entry code. Note that false negatives, i.e. not detecting
> >> > exception frames, would silently break the live patching consistency model.
> >> >
> >> > Furthermore, certain other places (diagnostic stacktraces, perf, xmon)
> >> > rely on STACK_FRAME_REGS_MARKER as well.
> >> >
> >> > Make the exception exit code clear the on-stack STACK_FRAME_REGS_MARKER
> >> > for those exceptions running on the "normal" kernel stack and returning
> >> > to kernelspace: because the topmost frame is ignored by the reliable stack
> >> > tracer anyway, returns to userspace don't need to take care of clearing
> >> > the marker.
> >> >
> >> > Furthermore, as I don't have the ability to test this on Book 3E or
> >> > 32 bits, limit the change to Book 3S and 64 bits.
> >> >
> >> > Finally, make the HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE Kconfig option depend on
> >> > PPC_BOOK3S_64 for documentation purposes. Before this patch, it depended
> >> > on PPC64 && CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN and because CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN implies
> >> > PPC_BOOK3S_64, there's no functional change here.
> >> >
> >> > Fixes: df78d3f61480 ("powerpc/livepatch: Implement reliable stack tracing for the consistency model")
> >> > Reported-by: Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>
> >> > Signed-off-by: Nicolai Stange <nstange@suse.de>
> >> > Signed-off-by: Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>
> >> > ---
> >> >  arch/powerpc/Kconfig           | 2 +-
> >> >  arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S | 7 +++++++
> >> >  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
> >> > index 2890d36eb531..73bf87b1d274 100644
> >> > --- a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
> >> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
> >> > @@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ config PPC
> >> >       select HAVE_PERF_USER_STACK_DUMP
> >> >       select HAVE_RCU_TABLE_FREE              if SMP
> >> >       select HAVE_REGS_AND_STACK_ACCESS_API
> >> > -     select HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE         if PPC64 && CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN
> >> > +     select HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE         if PPC_BOOK3S_64 && CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN
> >> >       select HAVE_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINTS
> >> >       select HAVE_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING
> >> >       select HAVE_IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING
> >> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S b/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S
> >> > index 435927f549c4..a2c168b395d2 100644
> >> > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S
> >> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S
> >> > @@ -1002,6 +1002,13 @@ END_FTR_SECTION_IFSET(CPU_FTR_HAS_PPR)
> >> >       ld      r2,_NIP(r1)
> >> >       mtspr   SPRN_SRR0,r2
> >> >
> >> > +     /*
> >> > +      * Leaving a stale exception_marker on the stack can confuse
> >> > +      * the reliable stack unwinder later on. Clear it.
> >> > +      */
> >> > +     li      r2,0
> >> > +     std     r2,STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD-16(r1)
> >> > +
> >>
> >> Could you please double check, r4 is already 0 at this point
> >> IIUC. So the change might be a simple
> >>
> >> std r4,STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD-16(r1)
> >>
> >
> > r4 is not 0, sorry for the noise
>
>
 Isn't it?

It is, I seem to be reading the wrong bits and confused myself, had to
re-read mtmsrd to ensure it does not modify RS, just MSR. So I guess
we could reuse r4. Should I send a patch on top of this? I have
limited testing infrastructure at the moment, I could use qemu

Balbir Singh.