commit 325f3fb551f8cd672dbbfc4cf58b14f9ee3fc9e8 upstream.
When unloading a module, its state is changing MODULE_STATE_LIVE ->
MODULE_STATE_GOING -> MODULE_STATE_UNFORMED. Each change will take
a time. `is_module_text_address()` and `__module_text_address()`
works with MODULE_STATE_LIVE and MODULE_STATE_GOING.
If we use `is_module_text_address()` and `__module_text_address()`
separately, there is a chance that the first one is succeeded but the
next one is failed because module->state becomes MODULE_STATE_UNFORMED
between those operations.
In `check_kprobe_address_safe()`, if the second `__module_text_address()`
is failed, that is ignored because it expected a kernel_text address.
But it may have failed simply because module->state has been changed
to MODULE_STATE_UNFORMED. In this case, arm_kprobe() will try to modify
non-exist module text address (use-after-free).
To fix this problem, we should not use separated `is_module_text_address()`
and `__module_text_address()`, but use only `__module_text_address()`
once and do `try_module_get(module)` which is only available with
MODULE_STATE_LIVE.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240410015802.265220-1-zhengyejian1@huawei.com/
Fixes: 28f6c37a2910 ("kprobes: Forbid probing on trampoline and BPF code areas")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Zheng Yejian <zhengyejian1@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
[Fix conflict due to lack dependency
commit 223a76b268c9 ("kprobes: Fix coding style issues")]
Signed-off-by: Zheng Yejian <zhengyejian1@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
commit 4fbd2f83fda0ca44a2ec6421ca3508b355b31858 upstream.
Since forcibly unoptimized kprobes will be put on the freeing_list directly
in the unoptimize_kprobe(), do_unoptimize_kprobes() must continue to check
the freeing_list even if unoptimizing_list is empty.
This bug can happen if a kprobe is put in an instruction which is in the
middle of the jump-replaced instruction sequence of an optprobe, *and* the
optprobe is recently unregistered and queued on unoptimizing_list.
In this case, the optprobe will be unoptimized forcibly (means immediately)
and put it into the freeing_list, expecting the optprobe will be handled in
do_unoptimize_kprobe().
But if there is no other optprobes on the unoptimizing_list, current code
returns from the do_unoptimize_kprobe() soon and does not handle the
optprobe which is on the freeing_list. Then the optprobe will hit the
WARN_ON_ONCE() in the do_free_cleaned_kprobes(), because it is not handled
in the latter loop of the do_unoptimize_kprobe().
To solve this issue, do not return from do_unoptimize_kprobes() immediately
even if unoptimizing_list is empty.
Moreover, this change affects another case. kill_optimized_kprobes() expects
kprobe_optimizer() will just free the optprobe on freeing_list.
So I changed it to just do list_move() to freeing_list if optprobes are on
unoptimizing list. And the do_unoptimize_kprobe() will skip
arch_disarm_kprobe() if the probe on freeing_list has gone flag.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/Y8URdIfVr3pq2X8w@xpf.sh.intel.com/
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/167448024501.3253718.13037333683110512967.stgit@devnote3/
Fixes: e4add247789e ("kprobes: Fix optimize_kprobe()/unoptimize_kprobe() cancellation logic")
Reported-by: Pengfei Xu <pengfei.xu@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Acked-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <rostedt@goodmis.org>
[fp: adjust comment conflict regarding commit 223a76b268c9 ("kprobes: Fix
coding style issues")]
Signed-off-by: Fedor Pchelkin <pchelkin@ispras.ru>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
