On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 11:16:07 +0100
Andreas Ziegler <andreas.zieg...@fau.de> wrote:

> I went into this a bit deeper today, and right now it is simply failing 
> to parse the code because there is no FETCH_OP_COMM case in 
> process_fetch_insn() for uprobes so that will return -EILSEQ, leading to 
> a make_data_loc(0, ...) in store_trace_args(). If we just add 
> FETCH_OP_COMM and let val point to current->comm (that's what 
> trace_kprobe.c does), we get an -EFAULT return value from 
> fetch_store_string because strncpy_from_user() checks if the argument is 
> in user space.

Correct. I missed to add OP_COMM support. And uprobe's fetch_store_string
is only for user space strings.

> So I think we might need a special case for that, something like 
> FETCH_OP_ST_COMM_STRING which is only used for FETCH_OP_COMM and copies 
> current->comm over to the dynamic area. The implementation could be 
> similar to the old fetch_comm_string implementation before your rewrite.

Hmm, instead, I would like to add current->comm checker and only allows
to copy that. That would be simpler and enough.

Could you test below patch?

tracing: uprobes: Re-enable $comm support for uprobe events

From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhira...@kernel.org>

Since commit 533059281ee5 ("tracing: probeevent: Introduce new
argument fetching code") dropped the $comm support from uprobe
events, this re-enable it.

For $comm support, use strncpy() instead of strncpy_from_user()
to copy current task's comm. Because it is in the kernel space,
strncpy_from_user() always fails to copy the comm.
This also use strlen() instead of strlen_user() to measure the
length of the comm.

Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhira...@kernel.org>
Reported-by: Andreas Ziegler <andreas.zieg...@fau.de>
 kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c |   13 +++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
index e335576b9411..97d134e83e0f 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
@@ -156,7 +156,10 @@ fetch_store_string(unsigned long addr, void *dest, void 
        if (unlikely(!maxlen))
                return -ENOMEM;
-       ret = strncpy_from_user(dst, src, maxlen);
+       if (addr == (unsigned long)current->comm)
+               ret = strlcpy(dst, current->comm, maxlen);
+       else
+               ret = strncpy_from_user(dst, src, maxlen);
        if (ret >= 0) {
                if (ret == maxlen)
                        dst[ret - 1] = '\0';
@@ -173,7 +176,10 @@ fetch_store_strlen(unsigned long addr)
        int len;
        void __user *vaddr = (void __force __user *) addr;
-       len = strnlen_user(vaddr, MAX_STRING_SIZE);
+       if (addr == (unsigned long)current->comm)
+               len = strlen(current->comm);
+       else
+               len = strnlen_user(vaddr, MAX_STRING_SIZE);
        return (len > MAX_STRING_SIZE) ? 0 : len;
@@ -213,6 +219,9 @@ process_fetch_insn(struct fetch_insn *code, struct pt_regs 
*regs, void *dest,
        case FETCH_OP_IMM:
                val = code->immediate;
+       case FETCH_OP_COMM:
+               val = (unsigned long)current->comm;
+               break;
        case FETCH_OP_FOFFS:
                val = translate_user_vaddr(code->immediate);

Reply via email to