On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 04:49:47AM +0000, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
If tracer modifies a syscall number to -1, this traced system call should be skipped with a return value specified in x0. This patch implements this semantics.
Please note:
- syscall entry tracing and syscall exit tracing (ftrace tracepoint and audit) are always executed, if enabled, even when skipping a system call (that is, -1). In this way, we can avoid a potential bug where audit_syscall_entry() might be called without audit_syscall_exit() at the previous system call being called, that would cause OOPs in audit_syscall_entry().
Signed-off-by: AKASHI Takahiro takahiro.akashi@linaro.org
arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S | 10 +++++++++- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S index 726b910..946ec52 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S @@ -161,6 +161,7 @@ */ sc_nr .req x25 // number of system calls scno .req x26 // syscall number +scno_w .req w26 // syscall number (lower 32 bits) stbl .req x27 // syscall table pointer tsk .req x28 // current thread_info @@ -668,8 +669,14 @@ ENDPROC(el0_svc) * switches, and waiting for our parent to respond. */ __sys_trace:
- mov x0, sp
- cmp scno_w, #-1 // set default errno for
I hate that we have to use scno_w, but the only alternative I can think of is using w8 directly, which isn't any better and doesn't work for compat. Ho-hum, I guess we'll stick with what you have.
- b.ne 1f // user-issued syscall(-1)
- mov x0, #-ENOSYS
- str x0, [sp]
Can you use #S_X0 here for clarity, please?
+1: mov x0, sp bl syscall_trace_enter
- cmp w0, #-1 // skip the syscall?
- b.eq __sys_trace_return_skipped adr lr, __sys_trace_return // return address uxtw scno, w0 // syscall number (possibly new) mov x1, sp // pointer to regs
@@ -684,6 +691,7 @@ __sys_trace: __sys_trace_return: str x0, [sp] // save returned x0
and update this guy too.
Will