On 2024/4/9 22:28, Catalin Marinas wrote:
Hi Kefeng,
On Sun, Apr 07, 2024 at 04:12:10PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
index 405f9aa831bd..61a2acae0dca 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
@@ -500,9 +500,6 @@ static bool is_write_abort(unsigned long esr)
return (esr & ESR_ELx_WNR) && !(esr & ESR_ELx_CM);
}
-#define VM_FAULT_BADMAP ((__force vm_fault_t)0x010000)
-#define VM_FAULT_BADACCESS ((__force vm_fault_t)0x020000)
-
static int __kprobes do_page_fault(unsigned long far, unsigned long esr,
struct pt_regs *regs)
{
@@ -513,6 +510,7 @@ static int __kprobes do_page_fault(unsigned long far, unsigned long esr,
unsigned int mm_flags = FAULT_FLAG_DEFAULT;
unsigned long addr = untagged_addr(far);
struct vm_area_struct *vma;
+ int si_code;
I think we should initialise this to 0. Currently all paths seem to set
si_code to something meaningful but I'm not sure the last 'else' close
in this patch is guaranteed to always cover exactly those earlier code
paths updating si_code. I'm not talking about the 'goto bad_area' paths
since they set 'fault' to 0 but the fall through after the second (under
the mm lock) handle_mm_fault().
Recheck it, without this patch, the second handle_mm_fault() never
return VM_FAULT_BADACCESS, but could return VM_FAULT_SIGSEGV(maybe
other), which not handled in the other error path,
handle_mm_fault
ret = sanitize_fault_flags(vma, &flags);
if (!arch_vma_access_permitted())
ret = VM_FAULT_SIGSEGV;
so the orignal logical will set si_code to SEGV_MAPERR
fault == VM_FAULT_BADACCESS ? SEGV_ACCERR : SEGV_MAPERR,
therefore, i think we should set the default si_code to SEGV_MAPERR.
if (kprobe_page_fault(regs, esr))
return 0;
@@ -572,9 +570,10 @@ static int __kprobes do_page_fault(unsigned long far, unsigned long esr,
if (!(vma->vm_flags & vm_flags)) {
vma_end_read(vma);
- fault = VM_FAULT_BADACCESS;
+ fault = 0;
+ si_code = SEGV_ACCERR;
count_vm_vma_lock_event(VMA_LOCK_SUCCESS);
- goto done;
+ goto bad_area;
}
fault = handle_mm_fault(vma, addr, mm_flags | FAULT_FLAG_VMA_LOCK, regs);
if (!(fault & (VM_FAULT_RETRY | VM_FAULT_COMPLETED)))
@@ -599,15 +598,18 @@ static int __kprobes do_page_fault(unsigned long far, unsigned long esr,
retry:
vma = lock_mm_and_find_vma(mm, addr, regs);
if (unlikely(!vma)) {
- fault = VM_FAULT_BADMAP;
- goto done;
+ fault = 0;
+ si_code = SEGV_MAPERR;
+ goto bad_area;
}
- if (!(vma->vm_flags & vm_flags))
- fault = VM_FAULT_BADACCESS;
- else
- fault = handle_mm_fault(vma, addr, mm_flags, regs);
+ if (!(vma->vm_flags & vm_flags)) {
+ fault = 0;
+ si_code = SEGV_ACCERR;
+ goto bad_area;
+ }
What's releasing the mm lock here? Prior to this change, it is falling
through to mmap_read_unlock() below or handle_mm_fault() was releasing
the lock (VM_FAULT_RETRY, VM_FAULT_COMPLETED).
Indeed, will fix,
+ fault = handle_mm_fault(vma, addr, mm_flags, regs);
/* Quick path to respond to signals */
if (fault_signal_pending(fault, regs)) {
if (!user_mode(regs))
@@ -626,13 +628,11 @@ static int __kprobes do_page_fault(unsigned long far, unsigned long esr,
mmap_read_unlock(mm);
done:
- /*
- * Handle the "normal" (no error) case first.
- */
- if (likely(!(fault & (VM_FAULT_ERROR | VM_FAULT_BADMAP |
- VM_FAULT_BADACCESS))))
+ /* Handle the "normal" (no error) case first. */
+ if (likely(!(fault & VM_FAULT_ERROR)))
return 0;
+bad_area:
/*
* If we are in kernel mode at this point, we have no context to
* handle this fault with.
@@ -667,13 +667,8 @@ static int __kprobes do_page_fault(unsigned long far, unsigned long esr,
arm64_force_sig_mceerr(BUS_MCEERR_AR, far, lsb, inf->name);
} else {
- /*
- * Something tried to access memory that isn't in our memory
- * map.
- */
- arm64_force_sig_fault(SIGSEGV,
- fault == VM_FAULT_BADACCESS ? SEGV_ACCERR : SEGV_MAPERR,
- far, inf->name);
+ /* Something tried to access memory that out of memory map */
+ arm64_force_sig_fault(SIGSEGV, si_code, far, inf->name);
}
We can get to the 'else' close after the second handle_mm_fault(). Do we
guarantee that 'fault == 0' in this last block? If not, maybe a warning
and some safe initialisation for 'si_code' to avoid leaking stack data.
As analyzed above, it is sufficient that make si_code to SEGV_MAPPER by
default, right?
Thanks.
