diff options
author | Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> | 2017-12-31 10:18:06 -0600 |
---|---|---|
committer | Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> | 2018-01-03 16:14:46 +0100 |
commit | a9cdbe72c4e8bf3b38781c317a79326e2e1a230d (patch) | |
tree | 68cdaf511eb0f093cebb50d201d5ee8f399549cd /arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c | |
parent | 52994c256df36fda9a715697431cba9daecb6b11 (diff) | |
download | linux-stable-a9cdbe72c4e8bf3b38781c317a79326e2e1a230d.tar.gz linux-stable-a9cdbe72c4e8bf3b38781c317a79326e2e1a230d.tar.bz2 linux-stable-a9cdbe72c4e8bf3b38781c317a79326e2e1a230d.zip |
x86/dumpstack: Fix partial register dumps
The show_regs_safe() logic is wrong. When there's an iret stack frame,
it prints the entire pt_regs -- most of which is random stack data --
instead of just the five registers at the end.
show_regs_safe() is also poorly named: the on_stack() checks aren't for
safety. Rename the function to show_regs_if_on_stack() and add a
comment to explain why the checks are needed.
These issues were introduced with the "partial register dump" feature of
the following commit:
b02fcf9ba121 ("x86/unwinder: Handle stack overflows more gracefully")
That patch had gone through a few iterations of development, and the
above issues were artifacts from a previous iteration of the patch where
'regs' pointed directly to the iret frame rather than to the (partially
empty) pt_regs.
Tested-by: Alexander Tsoy <alexander@tsoy.me>
Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Toralf Förster <toralf.foerster@gmx.de>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Fixes: b02fcf9ba121 ("x86/unwinder: Handle stack overflows more gracefully")
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/5b05b8b344f59db2d3d50dbdeba92d60f2304c54.1514736742.git.jpoimboe@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c')
-rw-r--r-- | arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c | 28 |
1 files changed, 20 insertions, 8 deletions
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c b/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c index 5fa110699ed2..d0bb176a7261 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c @@ -76,12 +76,23 @@ void show_iret_regs(struct pt_regs *regs) regs->sp, regs->flags); } -static void show_regs_safe(struct stack_info *info, struct pt_regs *regs) +static void show_regs_if_on_stack(struct stack_info *info, struct pt_regs *regs, + bool partial) { - if (on_stack(info, regs, sizeof(*regs))) + /* + * These on_stack() checks aren't strictly necessary: the unwind code + * has already validated the 'regs' pointer. The checks are done for + * ordering reasons: if the registers are on the next stack, we don't + * want to print them out yet. Otherwise they'll be shown as part of + * the wrong stack. Later, when show_trace_log_lvl() switches to the + * next stack, this function will be called again with the same regs so + * they can be printed in the right context. + */ + if (!partial && on_stack(info, regs, sizeof(*regs))) { __show_regs(regs, 0); - else if (on_stack(info, (void *)regs + IRET_FRAME_OFFSET, - IRET_FRAME_SIZE)) { + + } else if (partial && on_stack(info, (void *)regs + IRET_FRAME_OFFSET, + IRET_FRAME_SIZE)) { /* * When an interrupt or exception occurs in entry code, the * full pt_regs might not have been saved yet. In that case @@ -98,6 +109,7 @@ void show_trace_log_lvl(struct task_struct *task, struct pt_regs *regs, struct stack_info stack_info = {0}; unsigned long visit_mask = 0; int graph_idx = 0; + bool partial; printk("%sCall Trace:\n", log_lvl); @@ -140,7 +152,7 @@ void show_trace_log_lvl(struct task_struct *task, struct pt_regs *regs, printk("%s <%s>\n", log_lvl, stack_name); if (regs) - show_regs_safe(&stack_info, regs); + show_regs_if_on_stack(&stack_info, regs, partial); /* * Scan the stack, printing any text addresses we find. At the @@ -164,7 +176,7 @@ void show_trace_log_lvl(struct task_struct *task, struct pt_regs *regs, /* * Don't print regs->ip again if it was already printed - * by show_regs_safe() below. + * by show_regs_if_on_stack(). */ if (regs && stack == ®s->ip) goto next; @@ -199,9 +211,9 @@ next: unwind_next_frame(&state); /* if the frame has entry regs, print them */ - regs = unwind_get_entry_regs(&state); + regs = unwind_get_entry_regs(&state, &partial); if (regs) - show_regs_safe(&stack_info, regs); + show_regs_if_on_stack(&stack_info, regs, partial); } if (stack_name) |