-
由 Sven Wegener 提交于
Commit 554086d8 ("x86_32, entry: Do syscall exit work on badsys (CVE-2014-4508)") introduced a regression in the x86_32 syscall entry code, resulting in syscall() not returning proper errors for undefined syscalls on CPUs supporting the sysenter feature. The following code: > int result = syscall(666); > printf("result=%d errno=%d error=%s\n", result, errno, strerror(errno)); results in: > result=666 errno=0 error=Success Obviously, the syscall return value is the called syscall number, but it should have been an ENOSYS error. When run under ptrace it behaves correctly, which makes it hard to debug in the wild: > result=-1 errno=38 error=Function not implemented The %eax register is the return value register. For debugging via ptrace the syscall entry code stores the complete register context on the stack. The badsys handlers only store the ENOSYS error code in the ptrace register set and do not set %eax like a regular syscall handler would. The old resume_userspace call chain contains code that clobbers %eax and it restores %eax from the ptrace registers afterwards. The same goes for the ptrace-enabled call chain. When ptrace is not used, the syscall return value is the passed-in syscall number from the untouched %eax register. Use %eax as the return value register in syscall_badsys and sysenter_badsys, like a real syscall handler does, and have the caller push the value onto the stack for ptrace access. Signed-off-by: NSven Wegener <sven.wegener@stealer.net> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/alpine.LNX.2.11.1407221022380.31021@titan.int.lan.stealer.netReviewed-and-tested-by: NAndy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # If 554086d8 is backported Signed-off-by: NH. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
8142b215