Re: [PATCH]kprobes sample driver

Vamsi Krishna S . (vamsi@in.ibm.com)
Wed, 13 Nov 2002 13:24:21 +0530


Hi,

This is very nice. In fact, I will probably start using this for
testing kprobes myself. I have a few comments, given below inline.

Thank you,
Vamsi.

PS: I am cc'ing dprobes mailing list for folks who hang out there
to have a chance to take a look at this and may be comment/use.
Hope you don't mind.

-- 
Vamsi Krishna S.
Linux Technology Center,
IBM Software Lab, Bangalore.
Ph: +91 80 5044959
Internet: vamsi@in.ibm.com

On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 09:18:21PM -0800, Rusty Lynch wrote: > This is a sample kprobes module that implements a simple misc char device > that can cause arbitrary text to be printk'ed when arbitrary kernel > addresses are executed. > Nice idea.

> +static struct list_head probe_list; > +struct nprobe { > + struct list_head list; > + struct kprobe probe; > + char message[MAX_MSG_SIZE + 1]; > +}; > + Good. This is how I meant struct kprobe to be used: as a part of a bigger structure that the caller uses to manage probes.

> +static void noisy_pre_handler(struct kprobe *p, struct pt_regs *r) > +{ > + struct list_head *tmp; > + > + printk(KERN_CRIT "noisy: noisy_prehandler\n"); > + list_for_each(tmp, &probe_list) { > + struct nprobe *c = list_entry(tmp, struct nprobe, list); > + if (&(c->probe) == p) { > + printk(KERN_CRIT "%s\n", c->message); > + } > + } > +} Actually, you can do this in a much easier way without having to loop through all probes. All you need is:

static void noisy_pre_handler(struct kprobe *p, struct pt_regs *r) { struct nprobe *c = container_of(p, struct nprobe, probe); printk(KERN_CRIT "%s: %s\n", __FUNCTION__, c->message); }

> +static ssize_t noisy_read(struct file *file, char *buf, > + size_t count, loff_t *ppos) > +{ > + struct list_head *tmp; > + > + printk(KERN_CRIT "noisy: noisy_read\n"); > + list_for_each(tmp, &probe_list) { > + struct nprobe *p = list_entry(tmp, struct nprobe, list);

You could have used list_for_each_entry as:

struct nprobe *p;

list_for_each_entry(p, &probe_list, list) { ... }

> +static ssize_t noisy_write(struct file *file, const char *buf, size_t count, > + loff_t *ppos) > +{ > + struct nprobe *n = 0; > + size_t ret = -ENOMEM; > + char *tmp = 0; > + > + printk(KERN_CRIT "noisy: noisy_write\n"); > + if (count > MAX_MSG_SIZE) { > + printk(KERN_CRIT > + "noisy: Input buffer (%i bytes) is too big!\n", > + count); > + ret = -EINVAL; > + goto out; > + } > + > + tmp = (char *)kmalloc(count + 1, GFP_KERNEL);

Don't bother casting the return values from kmalloc. It is not needed. Same for all other kmalloc calls here.

> + if (!tmp) { > + ret = -ENOMEM; > + goto out; > + } > + > + n = (struct nprobe *)kmalloc(sizeof(struct nprobe), GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!n) { > + ret = -ENOMEM; > + goto out; > + } > + memset(n, '\0', sizeof(struct nprobe)); > + > + if (copy_from_user((void *)tmp, (void *)buf, count)) { > + ret = -ENOMEM; > + goto out; > + } > + tmp[count] = '\0'; > + > + n = (struct nprobe *)kmalloc(sizeof(struct nprobe), GFP_KERNEL);

This is a duplicate call, kill it. You have already alloc'ed n above.

> + if (!n) { > + ret = -ENOMEM; > + goto out; > + } > + > + if (2 != sscanf(tmp, "0x%x %s", &(n->probe).addr, n->message)) { > + ret = -EINVAL; > + goto out; > + } > + (n->probe).pre_handler = noisy_pre_handler; > + (n->probe).post_handler = noisy_post_handler; > + (n->probe).fault_handler = noisy_fault_handler; > + > + { > + /* > + * I am attempting to verify that the kernel-mode address > + * passed in is valid, but I suspect this is not the > + * right way of doing this. > + * > + * Although, it appears to work. I can attempt to setup > + * a probe for 0xfffffff0, and the write operation fails with > + * -EINVAL. > + */ > + unsigned short eip; > + if (__get_user(eip, (unsigned short *)(n->probe).addr)) { > + ret = -EINVAL; > + goto out; > + } > + } This is not quite right. I will reply to your other post on how to improve this check. > + > + if (register_kprobe(&(n->probe))) { > + printk(KERN_CRIT "Unable to register probe at %p\n", > + (n->probe).addr); > + if (n) > + kfree(n);

kfree(NULL) is valid. No need for if (n). Same comment for kfree(tmp); - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/