Re: [PATCH] x86/ibt: make is_endbr() notrace

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 09:02:31AM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 6:32???AM Menglong Dong <menglong8.dong@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 9:05???PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 08:09:39PM +0800, Menglong Dong wrote:
> > > > is_endbr() is called in __ftrace_return_to_handler -> fprobe_return ->
> > > > kprobe_multi_link_exit_handler -> is_endbr.
> > > >
> > > > It is not protected by the "bpf_prog_active", so it can't be traced by
> > > > kprobe-multi, which can cause recurring and panic the kernel. Fix it by
> > > > make it notrace.
> > >
> > > This is very much a riddle wrapped in an enigma. Notably
> > > kprobe_multi_link_exit_handler() does not call is_endbr(). Nor is that
> > > cryptic next line sufficient to explain why its a problem.
> > >
> > > I suspect the is_endbr() you did mean is the one in
> > > arch_ftrace_get_symaddr(), but who knows.
> >
> > Yeah, I mean
> > kprobe_multi_link_exit_handler -> ftrace_get_entry_ip ->
> > arch_ftrace_get_symaddr -> is_endbr
> > actually. And CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT is enabled of course.
> 
> All this makes sense to me.

As written down, I'm still clueless.

> __noendbr bool is_endbr(u32 *val) needs "notrace",
> since it's in alternative.c and won't get inlined (unless LTO+luck).

notrace don't help with kprobes in general, only with __fentry__ sites.

I've still not clue why there is a panic, or why notrace would be
sufficient.