Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] arm64: kprobes: disable preemption across XOL single-step

[Google]

On Tue, 17 Feb 2026 16:55:44 +0000
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 07:08:54PM +0530, Khaja Hussain Shaik Khaji wrote:
> > On arm64, non-emulatable kprobes instructions execute out-of-line (XOL)
> > after returning from the initial debug exception. The XOL instruction
> > runs in normal kernel context, while kprobe state is maintained per-CPU.
> 
> The XOL instruction runs in a context with all DAIF bits set (see
> kprobes_save_local_irqflag() and kprobes_restore_local_irqflag()), so
> not quite a regular kernel context.
> 
> > If the task is preempted or migrates during the XOL window, the subsequent
> > SS-BRK exception may be handled on a different CPU, corrupting per-CPU
> > kprobe state and preventing correct recovery.
> 
> I think we need a better explanation of this.
> 
> Since DAIF is masked, we won't take an IRQ to preempt during the actual
> XOL execution.
> 
> AFAICT we *could* explicitly preempt/schedule in C code around the XOL
> execution. However, AFAICT that'd equally apply to other architectures,
> and on x86 they *removed* the preempt count manipulation in commit:
> 
>   2bbda764d720aaca ("kprobes/x86: Do not disable preempt on int3 path")
> 
> ... so it looks like there's a wider potential problem here.
> 
> Can you please share an example failure that you have seen? .. and how
> you triggered it (e.g. is this a plain kprobe, something with bpf, etc).

Yeah, this is important to know. Did it really happen on the single
stepping? or in user's handler function?

> 
> I reckon you could hack a warning something into schedule() (or
> cond_resched(), etc) that detects when there's an active XOL slot, so
> that we can get the full backtrace.

Sounds good way to show it.

Thank you,

> 
> > Disable preemption across the XOL instruction and re-enable it in the
> > SS-BRK handler to prevent migration until control returns to the kprobe
> > handler.
> 
> This might work, but without some more detail I'm not certain this is
> sufficient, and I believe other architectures are likely affected by the
> same problem.
> 
> Thanks,
> Mark.
> 
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Khaja Hussain Shaik Khaji <khaja.khaji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c
> > index 43a0361a8bf0..d8a70c456543 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c
> > @@ -227,6 +227,14 @@ static void __kprobes setup_singlestep(struct kprobe *p,
> >  
> >  		kprobes_save_local_irqflag(kcb, regs);
> >  		instruction_pointer_set(regs, slot);
> > +
> > +		/*
> > +		 * Disable preemption across the out-of-line (XOL) instruction.
> > +		 * The XOL instruction executes in normal kernel context and
> > +		 * kprobe state is per-CPU.
> > +		 */
> > +		preempt_disable();
> > +
> >  	} else {
> >  		/* insn simulation */
> >  		arch_simulate_insn(p, regs);
> > @@ -363,6 +371,11 @@ kprobe_ss_brk_handler(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long esr)
> >  		kprobes_restore_local_irqflag(kcb, regs);
> >  		post_kprobe_handler(cur, kcb, regs);
> >  
> > +		/*
> > +		 * Re-enable preemption after completing the XOL instruction.
> > +		 */
> > +		preempt_enable_no_resched();
> > +
> >  		return DBG_HOOK_HANDLED;
> >  	}
> >  
> > -- 
> > 2.34.1
> > 
> 


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx>