linux.git/fs/proc/base.c, branch v4.13

fault-inject: add /proc//fail-nth

2017-07-14T22:05:13+00:00

fail-nth interface is only created in /proc/self/task//.
This change also adds it in /proc//.

This makes shell based tool a bit simpler.

	$ bash -c "builtin echo 100 > /proc/self/fail-nth && exec ls /"

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1491490561-10485-6-git-send-email-akinobu.mita@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Akinobu Mita 
Cc: Dmitry Vyukov 
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton 
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

fault-inject: simplify access check for fail-nth

2017-07-14T22:05:13+00:00

The fail-nth file is created with 0666 and the access is permitted if
and only if the task is current.

This file is owned by the currnet user.  So we can create it with 0644
and allow the owner to write it.  This enables to watch the status of
task->fail_nth from another processes.

[akinobu.mita@gmail.com: don't convert unsigned type value as signed int]
  Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1492444483-9239-1-git-send-email-akinobu.mita@gmail.com
[akinobu.mita@gmail.com: avoid unwanted data race to task->fail_nth]
  Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1499962492-8931-1-git-send-email-akinobu.mita@gmail.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1491490561-10485-5-git-send-email-akinobu.mita@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Akinobu Mita 
Acked-by: Dmitry Vyukov 
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton 
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

fault-inject: make fail-nth read/write interface symmetric

2017-07-14T22:05:13+00:00

The read interface for fail-nth looks a bit odd.  Read from this file
returns "NYYYY..." or "YYYYY..." (this makes me surprise when cat this
file).  Because there is no EOF condition.  The first character
indicates current->fail_nth is zero or not, and then current->fail_nth
is reset to zero.

Just returning task->fail_nth value is more natural to understand.

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1491490561-10485-4-git-send-email-akinobu.mita@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Akinobu Mita 
Cc: Dmitry Vyukov 
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton 
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

fault-inject: parse as natural 1-based value for fail-nth write interface

2017-07-14T22:05:13+00:00

The value written to fail-nth file is parsed as 0-based.  Parsing as
one-based is more natural to understand and it enables to cancel the
previous setup by simply writing '0'.

This change also converts task->fail_nth from signed to unsigned int.

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1491490561-10485-3-git-send-email-akinobu.mita@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Akinobu Mita 
Cc: Dmitry Vyukov 
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton 
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

fault-inject: automatically detect the number base for fail-nth write interface

2017-07-14T22:05:13+00:00

Automatically detect the number base to use when writing to fail-nth
file instead of always parsing as a decimal number.

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1491490561-10485-2-git-send-email-akinobu.mita@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Akinobu Mita 
Cc: Dmitry Vyukov 
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton 
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

fault-inject: support systematic fault injection

2017-07-12T23:26:01+00:00

Add /proc/self/task//fail-nth file that allows failing
0-th, 1-st, 2-nd and so on calls systematically.
Excerpt from the added documentation:

 "Write to this file of integer N makes N-th call in the current task
  fail (N is 0-based). Read from this file returns a single char 'Y' or
  'N' that says if the fault setup with a previous write to this file
  was injected or not, and disables the fault if it wasn't yet injected.
  Note that this file enables all types of faults (slab, futex, etc).
  This setting takes precedence over all other generic settings like
  probability, interval, times, etc. But per-capability settings (e.g.
  fail_futex/ignore-private) take precedence over it. This feature is
  intended for systematic testing of faults in a single system call. See
  an example below"

Why add a new setting:
1. Existing settings are global rather than per-task.
   So parallel testing is not possible.
2. attr->interval is close but it depends on attr->count
   which is non reset to 0, so interval does not work as expected.
3. Trying to model this with existing settings requires manipulations
   of all of probability, interval, times, space, task-filter and
   unexposed count and per-task make-it-fail files.
4. Existing settings are per-failure-type, and the set of failure
   types is potentially expanding.
5. make-it-fail can't be changed by unprivileged user and aggressive
   stress testing better be done from an unprivileged user.
   Similarly, this would require opening the debugfs files to the
   unprivileged user, as he would need to reopen at least times file
   (not possible to pre-open before dropping privs).

The proposed interface solves all of the above (see the example).

We want to integrate this into syzkaller fuzzer.  A prototype has found
10 bugs in kernel in first day of usage:

  https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/syzkaller/%22FAULT_INJECTION%22%7Csort:relevance

I've made the current interface work with all types of our sandboxes.
For setuid the secret sauce was prctl(PR_SET_DUMPABLE, 1, 0, 0, 0) to
make /proc entries non-root owned.  So I am fine with the current
version of the code.

[akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix build]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170328130128.101773-1-dvyukov@google.com
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Vyukov 
Cc: Akinobu Mita 
Cc: Michal Hocko 
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton 
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

"Yes, people use FOLL_FORCE ;)"

2017-05-30T19:38:59+00:00

This effectively reverts commit 8ee74a91ac30 ("proc: try to remove use
of FOLL_FORCE entirely")

It turns out that people do depend on FOLL_FORCE for the /proc//mem
case, and we're talking not just debuggers. Talking to the affected people, the use-cases are:

Keno Fischer:
 "We used these semantics as a hardening mechanism in the julia JIT. By
  opening /proc/self/mem and using these semantics, we could avoid
  needing RWX pages, or a dual mapping approach. We do have fallbacks to
  these other methods (though getting EIO here actually causes an assert
  in released versions - we'll updated that to make sure to take the
  fall back in that case).

  Nevertheless the /proc/self/mem approach was our favored approach
  because it a) Required an attacker to be able to execute syscalls
  which is a taller order than getting memory write and b) didn't double
  the virtual address space requirements (as a dual mapping approach
  would).

  I think in general this feature is very useful for anybody who needs
  to precisely control the execution of some other process. Various
  debuggers (gdb/lldb/rr) certainly fall into that category, but there's
  another class of such processes (wine, various emulators) which may
  want to do that kind of thing.

  Now, I suspect most of these will have the other process under ptrace
  control, so maybe allowing (same_mm || ptraced) would be ok, but at
  least for the sandbox/remote-jit use case, it would be perfectly
  reasonable to not have the jit server be a ptracer"

Robert O'Callahan:
 "We write to readonly code and data mappings via /proc/.../mem in lots
  of different situations, particularly when we're adjusting program
  state during replay to match the recorded execution.

  Like Julia, we can add workarounds, but they could be expensive."

so not only do people use FOLL_FORCE for both reads and writes, but they
use it for both the local mm and remote mm.

With these comments in mind, we likely also cannot add the "are we
actively ptracing" check either, so this keeps the new code organization
and does not do a real revert that would add back the original comment
about "Maybe we should limit FOLL_FORCE to actual ptrace users?"

Reported-by: Keno Fischer 
Reported-by: Robert O'Callahan 
Cc: Kees Cook 
Cc: Andy Lutomirski 
Cc: Eric Biederman 
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

proc: try to remove use of FOLL_FORCE entirely

2017-05-09T15:45:16+00:00

We fixed the bugs in it, but it's still an ugly interface, so let's see
if anybody actually depends on it.  It's entirely possible that nothing
actually requires the whole "punch through read-only mappings"
semantics.

For example, gdb definitely uses the /proc//mem interface, but it
looks like it mainly does it for regular reads of the target (that don't
need FOLL_FORCE), and looking at the gdb source code seems to fall back
on the traditional ptrace(PTRACE_POKEDATA) interface if it needs to.

If this breaks something, I do have a (more complex) version that only
enables FOLL_FORCE when somebody has PTRACE_ATTACH'ed to the target,
like the comment here used to say ("Maybe we should limit FOLL_FORCE to
actual ptrace users?").

Cc: Kees Cook 
Cc: Andy Lutomirski 
Cc: Eric Biederman 
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

livepatch: add /proc//patch_state

2017-03-08T08:38:19+00:00

Expose the per-task patch state value so users can determine which tasks
are holding up completion of a patching operation.

Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf 
Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek 
Reviewed-by: Miroslav Benes 
Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina

Merge branch 'rebased-statx' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/viro/vfs

2017-03-03T19:38:56+00:00

Pull vfs 'statx()' update from Al Viro.

This adds the new extended stat() interface that internally subsumes our
previous stat interfaces, and allows user mode to specify in more detail
what kind of information it wants.

It also allows for some explicit synchronization information to be
passed to the filesystem, which can be relevant for network filesystems:
is the cached value ok, or do you need open/close consistency, or what?

From David Howells.

Andreas Dilger points out that the first version of the extended statx
interface was posted June 29, 2010:

    https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-fsdevel/msg33831.html

* 'rebased-statx' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/viro/vfs:
  statx: Add a system call to make enhanced file info available