On Mon, 2014-04-07 at 16:27 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 04/06, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > Incomplete, lacks "jcxz". Simple to fix. Anything else?
> 
> Please see v2 below. Simplify the preprocessor hacks.
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Subject: [RFC PATCH v2 5/6] uprobes/x86: Emulate rip-relative conditional 
> "short" jmp's
> 
> Incomplete, lacks "jcxz". Simple to fix. Anything else?
> 
> Reported-by: Jonathan Lebon <jle...@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <o...@redhat.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c |   61 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c b/arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c
> index 9283024..3865d8b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c
> @@ -466,18 +466,72 @@ static bool ttt_is_call(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe)
>       return auprobe->ttt.opc1 == 0xe8;
>  }
> 
> +#define CASE_COND                                    \
> +     COND(70, 71, XF(OF))                            \
> +     COND(72, 73, XF(CF))                            \
> +     COND(74, 75, XF(ZF))                            \
> +     COND(78, 79, XF(SF))                            \
> +     COND(7a, 7b, XF(PF))                            \
> +     COND(76, 77, XF(CF) || XF(ZF))                  \
> +     COND(7c, 7d, XF(SF) != XF(OF))                  \
> +     COND(7e, 7f, XF(ZF) || XF(SF) != XF(OF))
> +
> +#define COND(op_y, op_n, expr)                               \
> +     case 0x ## op_y: DO((expr) != 0)                \
> +     case 0x ## op_n: DO((expr) == 0)
> +
> +#define XF(xf)       (!!(flags & X86_EFLAGS_ ## xf))

All this macro magic seems way more clever than it is legible.

Given that you're mapping 0f 8x to 7x (patch #6), is_cond_jmp_opcode()
could just be
        return (0x70 <= opcode && opcode <= 0x7f);

I would keep the XF macro (although the !! operation to convert non-zero
to 1 isn't strictly needed) and just do an explicit 16-case switch for
check_jmp_cond().

> +
> +static bool is_cond_jmp_opcode(u8 opcode)
> +{
> +     switch (opcode) {
> +     #define DO(expr)        \
> +             return true;
> +     CASE_COND
> +     #undef  DO
> +
> +     default:
> +             return false;
> +     }
> +}
> +
> +static bool check_jmp_cond(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct pt_regs *regs)
> +{
> +     unsigned long flags = regs->flags;
> +
> +     switch (auprobe->ttt.opc1) {
> +     case 0x00:      /* not a conditional jmp */
> +             return true;
> +
> +     #define DO(expr)        \
> +             return expr;
> +     CASE_COND
> +     #undef  DO
> +
> +     default:
> +             BUG();
> +     }
> +}
> +
> +#undef       XF
> +#undef       COND
> +#undef       CASE_COND
> +
>  static bool ttt_emulate_op(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct pt_regs *regs)
>  {
>       unsigned long new_ip = regs->ip += auprobe->ttt.ilen;
> +     unsigned long disp = auprobe->ttt.disp;

Looks like a negative ttt.disp will get sign-extended like you want, but
still, making disp unsigned here doesn't seem quite right.

> 
>       if (ttt_is_call(auprobe)) {
>               unsigned long new_sp = regs->sp - sizeof_long();
>               if (copy_to_user((void __user *)new_sp, &new_ip, sizeof_long()))
>                       return false;
>               regs->sp = new_sp;
> +     } else if (!check_jmp_cond(auprobe, regs)) {
> +             disp = 0;
>       }
> 
> -     regs->ip = new_ip + auprobe->ttt.disp;
> +     regs->ip = new_ip + disp;
>       return true;
>  }
> 
> @@ -536,8 +590,11 @@ static int ttt_setup_xol_ops(struct arch_uprobe 
> *auprobe, struct insn *insn)
>               ttt_clear_displacement(auprobe, insn);
>               auprobe->ttt.opc1 = opc1;
>               break;
> +
>       default:
> -             return -ENOSYS;
> +             if (!is_cond_jmp_opcode(opc1))
> +                     return -ENOSYS;
> +             auprobe->ttt.opc1 = opc1;
>       }
> 
>       auprobe->ttt.ilen = insn->length;


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to