x86/kprobes: Fix crash when probing CS CALL instructionsgrafted

When using eBPF to probe CS CALL instructions within a function,
a crash can be triggered.

The eBPF tool probes offset 257 of the __hrtimer_run_queues()
function:

<__hrtimer_run_queues+249>:  nopl   0x0(%rax,%rax,1)
<__hrtimer_run_queues+254>:  mov    %r14,%rdi
<__hrtimer_run_queues+257>:  cs call <__x86_indirect_thunk_r12>
<__hrtimer_run_queues+263>:  mov    %eax,%r12d
<__hrtimer_run_queues+266>:  xchg   %ax,%ax
<__hrtimer_run_queues+268>:  mov    %r13,%rdi

Which triggers this crash:

  BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: 00000000000f41c9
  #PF: supervisor write access in kernel mode
  #PF: error_code(0x0002) - not-present page
  PGD 0 P4D 0
  Oops: 0002 [#1] SMP NOPTI
  CPU: 1 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/1 Kdump: loaded Tainted: P
  RIP: 0010:__hrtimer_run_queues+0x106/0x230

Note that __hrtimer_run_queues+0x106 is __hrtimer_run_queues+262, which is
at the 6th byte of the above CS CALL instruction. Since the CS CALL
instruction occupies 6 bytes, the exception occurred in the middle of that
call instruction.

The root cause is that when using eBPF tools to probe in the middle of a
function, a kprobe with INT3 is used as the underlying implementation.

During single-step emulation of the original CALL instruction,
int3_emulate_call() assumes that the probed CALL instruction is 5 bytes
long. However, the actual CS-prefixed CALL instruction occupies 6 bytes,
so it constructs an incorrect exception return address. When the CPU
returns from the kprobe handler, the next instruction to be executed is at
the address of the last byte of that CS CALL instruction. Coincidentally,
starting from that address, the CPU fetches and decodes a completely
different instruction, which ultimately triggers a kernel crash.

Fix the issue by using the actual instruction length obtained from
the instruction decoder when constructing the exception return
address, rather than relying on the hardcoded CALL_INSN_SIZE macro.

[ mingo: Refined the changelog ]

Fixes: 6256e668b7af ("x86/kprobes: Use int3 instead of debug trap for single-step")
Suggested-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Jinke Han <jinkehan@didiglobal.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260908073742.GA10517@didi-ThinkCentre-M920t-N000

1 files changed, 85 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/sparse.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/sparse.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..37b201708
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/sparse.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+.. Copyright 2004 Linus Torvalds
+.. Copyright 2004 Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
+.. Copyright 2006 Bob Copeland <me@bobcopeland.com>
+
+Sparse
+======
+
+Sparse is a semantic checker for C programs; it can be used to find a
+number of potential problems with kernel code.  See
+https://lwn.net/Articles/689907/ for an overview of sparse; this document
+contains some kernel-specific sparse information.
+More information on sparse, mainly about its internals, can be found in
+its official pages at https://sparse.docs.kernel.org.
+
+
+Using sparse for typechecking
+-----------------------------
+
+"__bitwise" is a type attribute, so you have to do something like this::
+
+        typedef int __bitwise pm_request_t;
+
+        enum pm_request {
+                PM_SUSPEND = (__force pm_request_t) 1,
+                PM_RESUME = (__force pm_request_t) 2
+        };
+
+which makes PM_SUSPEND and PM_RESUME "bitwise" integers (the "__force" is
+there because sparse will complain about casting to/from a bitwise type,
+but in this case we really _do_ want to force the conversion). And because
+the enum values are all the same type, now "enum pm_request" will be that
+type too.
+
+And with gcc, all the "__bitwise"/"__force stuff" goes away, and it all
+ends up looking just like integers to gcc.
+
+Quite frankly, you don't need the enum there. The above all really just
+boils down to one special "int __bitwise" type.
+
+So the simpler way is to just do::
+
+        typedef int __bitwise pm_request_t;
+
+        #define PM_SUSPEND ((__force pm_request_t) 1)
+        #define PM_RESUME ((__force pm_request_t) 2)
+
+and you now have all the infrastructure needed for strict typechecking.
+
+One small note: the constant integer "0" is special. You can use a
+constant zero as a bitwise integer type without sparse ever complaining.
+This is because "bitwise" (as the name implies) was designed for making
+sure that bitwise types don't get mixed up (little-endian vs big-endian
+vs cpu-endian vs whatever), and there the constant "0" really _is_
+special.
+
+Getting sparse
+--------------
+
+You can get tarballs of the latest released versions from:
+https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/devel/sparse/dist/
+
+Alternatively, you can get snapshots of the latest development version
+of sparse using git to clone::
+
+        git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/devel/sparse/sparse.git
+
+Once you have it, just do::
+
+        make
+        make install
+
+as a regular user, and it will install sparse in your ~/bin directory.
+
+Using sparse
+------------
+
+Do a kernel make with "make C=1" to run sparse on all the C files that get
+recompiled, or use "make C=2" to run sparse on the files whether they need to
+be recompiled or not.  The latter is a fast way to check the whole tree if you
+have already built it.
+
+The optional make variable CF can be used to pass arguments to sparse.  The
+build system passes -Wbitwise to sparse automatically.
+
+Note that sparse defines the __CHECKER__ preprocessor symbol.