The patch titled
Subject: ia64: fix user_stack_pointer() for ptrace()
has been added to the -mm tree. Its filename is
ia64-fix-user_stack_pointer-for-ptrace.patch
This patch should soon appear at
https://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/ia64-fix-user_stack_pointer-for-ptrace.patch
and later at
https://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmotm/broken-out/ia64-fix-user_stack_pointer-for-ptrace.patch
Before you just go and hit "reply", please:
a) Consider who else should be cc'ed
b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well
c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a
reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's
*** Remember to use Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst when testing your code ***
The -mm tree is included into linux-next and is updated
there every 3-4 working days
------------------------------------------------------
From: Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: ia64: fix user_stack_pointer() for ptrace()
ia64 has two stacks:
- memory stack (or stack), pointed at by by r12
- register backing store (register stack), pointed at
ar.bsp/ar.bspstore with complications around dirty
register frame on CPU.
In https://bugs.gentoo.org/769614 Dmitry noticed that
PTRACE_GET_SYSCALL_INFO returns register stack instead
memory stack.
The bug comes from the fact that user_stack_pointer() and
current_user_stack_pointer() don't return the same register:
ulong user_stack_pointer(struct pt_regs *regs) { return regs->ar_bspstore; }
#define current_user_stack_pointer() (current_pt_regs()->r12)
The change gets both back in sync.
I think ptrace(PTRACE_GET_SYSCALL_INFO) is the only affected user
by this bug on ia64.
The change fixes 'rt_sigreturn.gen.test' strace test where
it was observed initially.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210331084447.2561532-1-slyfox@xxxxxxxxxx
Link: https://bugs.gentoo.org/769614
Signed-off-by: Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reported-by: Dmitry V. Levin <ldv@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/ia64/include/asm/ptrace.h | 8 +-------
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/ia64/include/asm/ptrace.h~ia64-fix-user_stack_pointer-for-ptrace
+++ a/arch/ia64/include/asm/ptrace.h
@@ -54,8 +54,7 @@
static inline unsigned long user_stack_pointer(struct pt_regs *regs)
{
- /* FIXME: should this be bspstore + nr_dirty regs? */
- return regs->ar_bspstore;
+ return regs->r12;
}
static inline int is_syscall_success(struct pt_regs *regs)
@@ -79,11 +78,6 @@ static inline long regs_return_value(str
unsigned long __ip = instruction_pointer(regs); \
(__ip & ~3UL) + ((__ip & 3UL) << 2); \
})
-/*
- * Why not default? Because user_stack_pointer() on ia64 gives register
- * stack backing store instead...
- */
-#define current_user_stack_pointer() (current_pt_regs()->r12)
/* given a pointer to a task_struct, return the user's pt_regs */
# define task_pt_regs(t) (((struct pt_regs *) ((char *) (t) + IA64_STK_OFFSET)) - 1)
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from slyfox@xxxxxxxxxx are
ia64-fix-user_stack_pointer-for-ptrace.patch
ia64-drop-unused-ia64_fw_emu-ifdef.patch
ia64-simplify-code-flow-around-swiotlb-init.patch
ia64-fix-efi_debug-build.patch
ia64-mca-always-make-ia64_mca_debug-an-expression.patch
mm-page_alloc-ignore-init_on_free=1-for-debug_pagealloc=1.patch
