Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] powerpc/uprobes: Validation for prefixed instruction
To:     Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com>, mpe@ellerman.id.au
Cc:     jniethe5@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paulus@samba.org,
        sandipan@linux.ibm.com, naveen.n.rao@linux.ibm.com,
        linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
References: <20210304050529.59391-1-ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com>
From:   Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
Message-ID: <ac7aa126-59dd-31be-1084-6d3a2f0e4eb4@csgroup.eu>
Date:   Thu, 4 Mar 2021 08:32:59 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20210304050529.59391-1-ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: fr
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk


Le 04/03/2021 à 06:05, Ravi Bangoria a écrit :
> As per ISA 3.1, prefixed instruction should not cross 64-byte
> boundary. So don't allow Uprobe on such prefixed instruction.
> 
> There are two ways probed instruction is changed in mapped pages.
> First, when Uprobe is activated, it searches for all the relevant
> pages and replace instruction in them. In this case, if that probe
> is on the 64-byte unaligned prefixed instruction, error out
> directly. Second, when Uprobe is already active and user maps a
> relevant page via mmap(), instruction is replaced via mmap() code
> path. But because Uprobe is invalid, entire mmap() operation can
> not be stopped. In this case just print an error and continue.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210204104703.273429-1-ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com
> v2->v3:
>    - Drop restriction for Uprobe on suffix of prefixed instruction.
>      It needs lot of code change including generic code but what
>      we get in return is not worth it.
> 
>   arch/powerpc/kernel/uprobes.c | 8 ++++++++
>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/uprobes.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/uprobes.c
> index e8a63713e655..c400971ebe70 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/uprobes.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/uprobes.c
> @@ -41,6 +41,14 @@ int arch_uprobe_analyze_insn(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe,
>   	if (addr & 0x03)
>   		return -EINVAL;
>   
> +	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PPC64) || !cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_ARCH_31))

cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_ARCH_31) should return 'false' when CONFIG_PPC64 is not enabled, no need to 
double check.

> +		return 0;
> +
> +	if (ppc_inst_prefixed(auprobe->insn) && (addr & 0x3F) == 0x3C) {

Maybe 3C instead of 4F ? : (addr & 0x3C) == 0x3C

What about

(addr & (SZ_64 - 4)) == SZ_64 - 4 to make it more explicit ?

Or ALIGN(addr, SZ_64) != ALIGN(addr + 8, SZ_64)

> +		pr_info_ratelimited("Cannot register a uprobe on 64 byte unaligned prefixed instruction\n");
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +	}
> +
>   	return 0;
>   }
>   
> 

Christophe