Re: [PATCH 1/1] stackleak: Disable ftrace for stackleak.c

From: Steven Rostedt
Date: Sun Nov 11 2018 - 20:53:57 EST


On Sun, 11 Nov 2018 13:19:45 +0300
Alexander Popov <alex.popov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 11.11.2018 2:30, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Sun, 11 Nov 2018 01:05:30 +0300
> > Alexander Popov <alex.popov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> The stackleak_erase() function is called on the trampoline stack at the
> >> end of syscall. This stack is not big enough for ftrace operations,
> >> e.g. it can be overflowed if we enable kprobe_events for stackleak_erase().
> >
> > Is the issue with kprobes or with function tracing? Because this stops
> > function tracing which I only want disabled if function tracing itself
> > is an issue, not for other things that may use the function tracing
> > infrastructure.
>
> Hello Steven,
>
> I believe that stackleak erasing is not compatible with function tracing itself.
> That's what the kernel testing robot has hit:
> https://www.openwall.com/lists/kernel-hardening/2018/11/09/1
>
> I used kprobe_events just to reproduce the problem:
> https://www.openwall.com/lists/kernel-hardening/2018/11/09/4

Have you tried adding a "notrace" to stackleak_erase()?

Not tracing the entire file is a bit of overkill. There's no reason
ftrace can't trace stack_erasing_sysctl() or perhaps even
stackleak_track_stack() as that may be very interesting to trace.

-- Steve