From a5f7a5bb3b7f28ba7e4fa246775b29a0e5537255 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jinke Han Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 15:37:42 +0800 Subject: x86/kprobes: Fix crash when probing CS CALL instructions 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) Signed-off-by: Jinke Han Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar Reviewed-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) Acked-by: Yafang Shao Acked-by: Borislav Petkov Cc: Peter Zijlstra Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260908073742.GA10517@didi-ThinkCentre-M920t-N000 --- Documentation/locking/rt-mutex.rst | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 77 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/locking/rt-mutex.rst (limited to 'Documentation/locking/rt-mutex.rst') diff --git a/Documentation/locking/rt-mutex.rst b/Documentation/locking/rt-mutex.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000..3b5097a38 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/locking/rt-mutex.rst @@ -0,0 +1,77 @@ +================================== +RT-mutex subsystem with PI support +================================== + +RT-mutexes with priority inheritance are used to support PI-futexes, +which enable pthread_mutex_t priority inheritance attributes +(PTHREAD_PRIO_INHERIT). [See Documentation/locking/pi-futex.rst for more details +about PI-futexes.] + +This technology was developed in the -rt tree and streamlined for +pthread_mutex support. + +Basic principles: +----------------- + +RT-mutexes extend the semantics of simple mutexes by the priority +inheritance protocol. + +A low priority owner of a rt-mutex inherits the priority of a higher +priority waiter until the rt-mutex is released. If the temporarily +boosted owner blocks on a rt-mutex itself it propagates the priority +boosting to the owner of the other rt_mutex it gets blocked on. The +priority boosting is immediately removed once the rt_mutex has been +unlocked. + +This approach allows us to shorten the block of high-prio tasks on +mutexes which protect shared resources. Priority inheritance is not a +magic bullet for poorly designed applications, but it allows +well-designed applications to use userspace locks in critical parts of +an high priority thread, without losing determinism. + +The enqueueing of the waiters into the rtmutex waiter tree is done in +priority order. For same priorities FIFO order is chosen. For each +rtmutex, only the top priority waiter is enqueued into the owner's +priority waiters tree. This tree too queues in priority order. Whenever +the top priority waiter of a task changes (for example it timed out or +got a signal), the priority of the owner task is readjusted. The +priority enqueueing is handled by "pi_waiters". + +RT-mutexes are optimized for fastpath operations and have no internal +locking overhead when locking an uncontended mutex or unlocking a mutex +without waiters. The optimized fastpath operations require cmpxchg +support. [If that is not available then the rt-mutex internal spinlock +is used] + +The state of the rt-mutex is tracked via the owner field of the rt-mutex +structure: + +lock->owner holds the task_struct pointer of the owner. Bit 0 is used to +keep track of the "lock has waiters" state: + + ============ ======= ================================================ + owner bit0 Notes + ============ ======= ================================================ + NULL 0 lock is free (fast acquire possible) + NULL 1 lock is free and has waiters and the top waiter + is going to take the lock [1]_ + taskpointer 0 lock is held (fast release possible) + taskpointer 1 lock is held and has waiters [2]_ + ============ ======= ================================================ + +The fast atomic compare exchange based acquire and release is only +possible when bit 0 of lock->owner is 0. + +.. [1] It also can be a transitional state when grabbing the lock + with ->wait_lock is held. To prevent any fast path cmpxchg to the lock, + we need to set the bit0 before looking at the lock, and the owner may + be NULL in this small time, hence this can be a transitional state. + +.. [2] There is a small time when bit 0 is set but there are no + waiters. This can happen when grabbing the lock in the slow path. + To prevent a cmpxchg of the owner releasing the lock, we need to + set this bit before looking at the lock. + +BTW, there is still technically a "Pending Owner", it's just not called +that anymore. The pending owner happens to be the top_waiter of a lock +that has no owner and has been woken up to grab the lock. -- cgit v1.3.1