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, 69 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/gpu/nova/guidelines.rst b/Documentation/gpu/nova/guidelines.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..13ab13984
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/gpu/nova/guidelines.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
+.. SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT)
+
+==========
+Guidelines
+==========
+
+This document describes the general project guidelines that apply to nova-core
+and nova-drm.
+
+Language
+========
+
+The Nova project uses the Rust programming language. In this context, all rules
+of the Rust for Linux project as documented in
+:doc:`../../rust/general-information` apply. Additionally, the following rules
+apply.
+
+- Unless technically necessary otherwise (e.g. uAPI), any driver code is written
+  in Rust.
+
+- Unless technically necessary, unsafe Rust code must be avoided. In case of
+  technical necessity, unsafe code should be isolated in a separate component
+  providing a safe API for other driver code to use.
+
+Style
+-----
+
+All rules of the Rust for Linux project as documented in
+:doc:`../../rust/coding-guidelines` apply.
+
+For a submit checklist, please also see the `Rust for Linux Submit checklist
+addendum <https://rust-for-linux.com/contributing#submit-checklist-addendum>`_.
+
+Documentation
+=============
+
+The availability of proper documentation is essential in terms of scalability,
+accessibility for new contributors and maintainability of a project in general,
+but especially for a driver running as complex hardware as Nova is targeting.
+
+Hence, adding documentation of any kind is very much encouraged by the project.
+
+Besides that, there are some minimum requirements.
+
+- Every non-private structure needs at least a brief doc comment explaining the
+  semantical sense of the structure, as well as potential locking and lifetime
+  requirements. It is encouraged to have the same minimum documentation for
+  non-trivial private structures.
+
+- uAPIs must be fully documented with kernel-doc comments; additionally, the
+  semantical behavior must be explained including potential special or corner
+  cases.
+
+- The APIs connecting the 1st level driver (nova-core) with 2nd level drivers
+  must be fully documented. This includes doc comments, potential locking and
+  lifetime requirements, as well as example code if applicable.
+
+- Abbreviations must be explained when introduced; terminology must be uniquely
+  defined.
+
+- Register addresses, layouts, shift values and masks must be defined properly;
+  unless obvious, the semantical sense must be documented. This only applies if
+  the author is able to obtain the corresponding information.
+
+Acceptance Criteria
+===================
+
+- Patches must only be applied if reviewed by at least one other person on the
+  mailing list; this also applies for maintainers.