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;
Date:   Mon, 21 Jun 2021 02:27:52 +0000
From:   Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@gmail.com>
Cc:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>,
        Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru>,
        Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com>,
        alpha <linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
        linux-m68k <linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>,
        Ley Foon Tan <ley.foon.tan@intel.com>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] alpha/ptrace: Record and handle the absence of
 switch_stack
Message-ID: <YM/5KAlgTtR6ncOl@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk>
References: <924ec53c-2fd9-2e1c-bbb1-3fda49809be4@gmail.com>
 <87eed4v2dc.fsf@disp2133>
 <5929e116-fa61-b211-342a-c706dcb834ca@gmail.com>
 <87fsxjorgs.fsf@disp2133>
 <87zgvqor7d.fsf_-_@disp2133>
 <CAHk-=wir2P6h+HKtswPEGDh+GKLMM6_h8aovpMcUHyQv2zJ5Og@mail.gmail.com>
 <87mtrpg47k.fsf@disp2133>
 <87pmwlek8d.fsf_-_@disp2133>
 <87k0mtek4n.fsf_-_@disp2133>
 <393c37de-5edf-effc-3d06-d7e63f34a317@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <393c37de-5edf-effc-3d06-d7e63f34a317@gmail.com>
Sender: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 02:01:18PM +1200, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> Hi Eric,
> 
> instrumenting get_reg on m68k and using a similar patch to yours to warn
> when unsaved registers are accessed on the switch stack, I get a hit from
> getegid and getegid32, just by running a simple ptrace on ls.
> 
> Going to wack those two moles now ...

Explain, please.  get_reg() is called by tracer; whose state are you checking?
Because you are *not* accessing the switch stack of the caller of get_reg().
And tracee should be in something like syscall_trace() or do_notify_resume();
both have SAVE_SWITCH_STACK done by the glue...