On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 04:12:00AM +0100, Jann Horn wrote:
> When the frame unwinder is invoked for an oops caused by a call to NULL,
> it currently skips the parent function because BP still points to the
> parent's stack frame; the (nonexistent) current function only has the first
> half of a stack frame, and BP doesn't point to it yet.
> 
> Add a special case for IP==0 that calculates a fake BP from SP, then uses
> the real BP for the next frame.
> 
> Note that this handles first_frame specially: We return information about
> the parent function as long as the saved IP is >=first_frame, even if the
> fake BP points below it.
> 
> With an artificially-added NULL call in prctl_set_seccomp(), before this
> patch, the trace is:
> 
> Call Trace:
>  ? prctl_set_seccomp+0x3a/0x50
>  __x64_sys_prctl+0x457/0x6f0
>  ? __ia32_sys_prctl+0x750/0x750
>  do_syscall_64+0x72/0x160
>  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
> 
> After this patch, the trace is:
> 
> Call Trace:
>  prctl_set_seccomp+0x3a/0x50
>  __x64_sys_prctl+0x457/0x6f0
>  ? __ia32_sys_prctl+0x750/0x750
>  do_syscall_64+0x72/0x160
>  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <ja...@google.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/include/asm/unwind.h  |  6 ++++++
>  arch/x86/kernel/unwind_frame.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++++---
>  2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/unwind.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/unwind.h
> index 1f86e1b0a5cd..499578f7e6d7 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/unwind.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/unwind.h
> @@ -23,6 +23,12 @@ struct unwind_state {
>  #elif defined(CONFIG_UNWINDER_FRAME_POINTER)
>       bool got_irq;
>       unsigned long *bp, *orig_sp, ip;
> +     /*
> +      * If non-NULL: The current frame is incomplete and doesn't contain a
> +      * valid BP. When looking for the next frame, use this instead of the
> +      * non-existent saved BP.
> +      */
> +     unsigned long *next_bp;
>       struct pt_regs *regs;
>  #else
>       unsigned long *sp;
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/unwind_frame.c b/arch/x86/kernel/unwind_frame.c
> index 3dc26f95d46e..9b9fd4826e7a 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/unwind_frame.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/unwind_frame.c
> @@ -320,10 +320,14 @@ bool unwind_next_frame(struct unwind_state *state)
>       }
>  
>       /* Get the next frame pointer: */
> -     if (state->regs)
> +     if (state->next_bp) {
> +             next_bp = state->next_bp;
> +             state->next_bp = NULL;
> +     } else if (state->regs) {
>               next_bp = (unsigned long *)state->regs->bp;
> -     else
> +     } else {
>               next_bp = (unsigned long *)READ_ONCE_TASK_STACK(state->task, 
> *state->bp);
> +     }
>  
>       /* Move to the next frame if it's safe: */
>       if (!update_stack_state(state, next_bp))
> @@ -398,6 +402,21 @@ void __unwind_start(struct unwind_state *state, struct 
> task_struct *task,
>  
>       bp = get_frame_pointer(task, regs);
>  
> +     /*
> +      * If we crash with IP==0, the last successfully executed instruction
> +      * was probably an indirect function call with a NULL function pointer.
> +      * That means that SP points into the middle of an incomplete frame:
> +      * *SP is a return pointer, and *(SP-sizeof(unsigned long)) is where we
> +      * would have written a frame pointer if we hadn't crashed.
> +      * Pretend that the frame is complete and that BP points to it, but save
> +      * the real BP so that we can use it when looking for the next frame.
> +      */
> +     if (regs && regs->ip == 0 &&

Would it make sense to do 'regs->ip < PAGE_SIZE', a la show_fault_oops()?
E.g. to handle bugs where a function pointer gets loaded with NULL+offset.

> +         (unsigned long *)kernel_stack_pointer(regs) >= first_frame) {
> +             state->next_bp = bp;
> +             bp = ((unsigned long *)kernel_stack_pointer(regs)) - 1;
> +     }
> +
>       /* Initialize stack info and make sure the frame data is accessible: */
>       get_stack_info(bp, state->task, &state->stack_info,
>                      &state->stack_mask);
> @@ -410,7 +429,7 @@ void __unwind_start(struct unwind_state *state, struct 
> task_struct *task,
>        */
>       while (!unwind_done(state) &&
>              (!on_stack(&state->stack_info, first_frame, sizeof(long)) ||
> -                     state->bp < first_frame))
> +                     (state->next_bp == NULL && state->bp < first_frame)))
>               unwind_next_frame(state);
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__unwind_start);
> -- 
> 2.21.0.352.gf09ad66450-goog
> 

Reply via email to