123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395 |
- =========
- Livepatch
- =========
- This document outlines basic information about kernel livepatching.
- Table of Contents:
- 1. Motivation
- 2. Kprobes, Ftrace, Livepatching
- 3. Consistency model
- 4. Livepatch module
- 4.1. New functions
- 4.2. Metadata
- 4.3. Livepatch module handling
- 5. Livepatch life-cycle
- 5.1. Registration
- 5.2. Enabling
- 5.3. Disabling
- 5.4. Unregistration
- 6. Sysfs
- 7. Limitations
- 1. Motivation
- =============
- There are many situations where users are reluctant to reboot a system. It may
- be because their system is performing complex scientific computations or under
- heavy load during peak usage. In addition to keeping systems up and running,
- users want to also have a stable and secure system. Livepatching gives users
- both by allowing for function calls to be redirected; thus, fixing critical
- functions without a system reboot.
- 2. Kprobes, Ftrace, Livepatching
- ================================
- There are multiple mechanisms in the Linux kernel that are directly related
- to redirection of code execution; namely: kernel probes, function tracing,
- and livepatching:
- + The kernel probes are the most generic. The code can be redirected by
- putting a breakpoint instruction instead of any instruction.
- + The function tracer calls the code from a predefined location that is
- close to the function entry point. This location is generated by the
- compiler using the '-pg' gcc option.
- + Livepatching typically needs to redirect the code at the very beginning
- of the function entry before the function parameters or the stack
- are in any way modified.
- All three approaches need to modify the existing code at runtime. Therefore
- they need to be aware of each other and not step over each other's toes.
- Most of these problems are solved by using the dynamic ftrace framework as
- a base. A Kprobe is registered as a ftrace handler when the function entry
- is probed, see CONFIG_KPROBES_ON_FTRACE. Also an alternative function from
- a live patch is called with the help of a custom ftrace handler. But there are
- some limitations, see below.
- 3. Consistency model
- ====================
- Functions are there for a reason. They take some input parameters, get or
- release locks, read, process, and even write some data in a defined way,
- have return values. In other words, each function has a defined semantic.
- Many fixes do not change the semantic of the modified functions. For
- example, they add a NULL pointer or a boundary check, fix a race by adding
- a missing memory barrier, or add some locking around a critical section.
- Most of these changes are self contained and the function presents itself
- the same way to the rest of the system. In this case, the functions might
- be updated independently one by one.
- But there are more complex fixes. For example, a patch might change
- ordering of locking in multiple functions at the same time. Or a patch
- might exchange meaning of some temporary structures and update
- all the relevant functions. In this case, the affected unit
- (thread, whole kernel) need to start using all new versions of
- the functions at the same time. Also the switch must happen only
- when it is safe to do so, e.g. when the affected locks are released
- or no data are stored in the modified structures at the moment.
- The theory about how to apply functions a safe way is rather complex.
- The aim is to define a so-called consistency model. It attempts to define
- conditions when the new implementation could be used so that the system
- stays consistent. The theory is not yet finished. See the discussion at
- http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1823033/focus=1828189
- The current consistency model is very simple. It guarantees that either
- the old or the new function is called. But various functions get redirected
- one by one without any synchronization.
- In other words, the current implementation _never_ modifies the behavior
- in the middle of the call. It is because it does _not_ rewrite the entire
- function in the memory. Instead, the function gets redirected at the
- very beginning. But this redirection is used immediately even when
- some other functions from the same patch have not been redirected yet.
- See also the section "Limitations" below.
- 4. Livepatch module
- ===================
- Livepatches are distributed using kernel modules, see
- samples/livepatch/livepatch-sample.c.
- The module includes a new implementation of functions that we want
- to replace. In addition, it defines some structures describing the
- relation between the original and the new implementation. Then there
- is code that makes the kernel start using the new code when the livepatch
- module is loaded. Also there is code that cleans up before the
- livepatch module is removed. All this is explained in more details in
- the next sections.
- 4.1. New functions
- ------------------
- New versions of functions are typically just copied from the original
- sources. A good practice is to add a prefix to the names so that they
- can be distinguished from the original ones, e.g. in a backtrace. Also
- they can be declared as static because they are not called directly
- and do not need the global visibility.
- The patch contains only functions that are really modified. But they
- might want to access functions or data from the original source file
- that may only be locally accessible. This can be solved by a special
- relocation section in the generated livepatch module, see
- Documentation/livepatch/module-elf-format.txt for more details.
- 4.2. Metadata
- ------------
- The patch is described by several structures that split the information
- into three levels:
- + struct klp_func is defined for each patched function. It describes
- the relation between the original and the new implementation of a
- particular function.
- The structure includes the name, as a string, of the original function.
- The function address is found via kallsyms at runtime.
- Then it includes the address of the new function. It is defined
- directly by assigning the function pointer. Note that the new
- function is typically defined in the same source file.
- As an optional parameter, the symbol position in the kallsyms database can
- be used to disambiguate functions of the same name. This is not the
- absolute position in the database, but rather the order it has been found
- only for a particular object ( vmlinux or a kernel module ). Note that
- kallsyms allows for searching symbols according to the object name.
- + struct klp_object defines an array of patched functions (struct
- klp_func) in the same object. Where the object is either vmlinux
- (NULL) or a module name.
- The structure helps to group and handle functions for each object
- together. Note that patched modules might be loaded later than
- the patch itself and the relevant functions might be patched
- only when they are available.
- + struct klp_patch defines an array of patched objects (struct
- klp_object).
- This structure handles all patched functions consistently and eventually,
- synchronously. The whole patch is applied only when all patched
- symbols are found. The only exception are symbols from objects
- (kernel modules) that have not been loaded yet. Also if a more complex
- consistency model is supported then a selected unit (thread,
- kernel as a whole) will see the new code from the entire patch
- only when it is in a safe state.
- 4.3. Livepatch module handling
- ------------------------------
- The usual behavior is that the new functions will get used when
- the livepatch module is loaded. For this, the module init() function
- has to register the patch (struct klp_patch) and enable it. See the
- section "Livepatch life-cycle" below for more details about these
- two operations.
- Module removal is only safe when there are no users of the underlying
- functions. The immediate consistency model is not able to detect this;
- therefore livepatch modules cannot be removed. See "Limitations" below.
- 5. Livepatch life-cycle
- =======================
- Livepatching defines four basic operations that define the life cycle of each
- live patch: registration, enabling, disabling and unregistration. There are
- several reasons why it is done this way.
- First, the patch is applied only when all patched symbols for already
- loaded objects are found. The error handling is much easier if this
- check is done before particular functions get redirected.
- Second, the immediate consistency model does not guarantee that anyone is not
- sleeping in the new code after the patch is reverted. This means that the new
- code needs to stay around "forever". If the code is there, one could apply it
- again. Therefore it makes sense to separate the operations that might be done
- once and those that need to be repeated when the patch is enabled (applied)
- again.
- Third, it might take some time until the entire system is migrated
- when a more complex consistency model is used. The patch revert might
- block the livepatch module removal for too long. Therefore it is useful
- to revert the patch using a separate operation that might be called
- explicitly. But it does not make sense to remove all information
- until the livepatch module is really removed.
- 5.1. Registration
- -----------------
- Each patch first has to be registered using klp_register_patch(). This makes
- the patch known to the livepatch framework. Also it does some preliminary
- computing and checks.
- In particular, the patch is added into the list of known patches. The
- addresses of the patched functions are found according to their names.
- The special relocations, mentioned in the section "New functions", are
- applied. The relevant entries are created under
- /sys/kernel/livepatch/<name>. The patch is rejected when any operation
- fails.
- 5.2. Enabling
- -------------
- Registered patches might be enabled either by calling klp_enable_patch() or
- by writing '1' to /sys/kernel/livepatch/<name>/enabled. The system will
- start using the new implementation of the patched functions at this stage.
- In particular, if an original function is patched for the first time, a
- function specific struct klp_ops is created and an universal ftrace handler
- is registered.
- Functions might be patched multiple times. The ftrace handler is registered
- only once for the given function. Further patches just add an entry to the
- list (see field `func_stack`) of the struct klp_ops. The last added
- entry is chosen by the ftrace handler and becomes the active function
- replacement.
- Note that the patches might be enabled in a different order than they were
- registered.
- 5.3. Disabling
- --------------
- Enabled patches might get disabled either by calling klp_disable_patch() or
- by writing '0' to /sys/kernel/livepatch/<name>/enabled. At this stage
- either the code from the previously enabled patch or even the original
- code gets used.
- Here all the functions (struct klp_func) associated with the to-be-disabled
- patch are removed from the corresponding struct klp_ops. The ftrace handler
- is unregistered and the struct klp_ops is freed when the func_stack list
- becomes empty.
- Patches must be disabled in exactly the reverse order in which they were
- enabled. It makes the problem and the implementation much easier.
- 5.4. Unregistration
- -------------------
- Disabled patches might be unregistered by calling klp_unregister_patch().
- This can be done only when the patch is disabled and the code is no longer
- used. It must be called before the livepatch module gets unloaded.
- At this stage, all the relevant sys-fs entries are removed and the patch
- is removed from the list of known patches.
- 6. Sysfs
- ========
- Information about the registered patches can be found under
- /sys/kernel/livepatch. The patches could be enabled and disabled
- by writing there.
- See Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-livepatch for more details.
- 7. Limitations
- ==============
- The current Livepatch implementation has several limitations:
- + The patch must not change the semantic of the patched functions.
- The current implementation guarantees only that either the old
- or the new function is called. The functions are patched one
- by one. It means that the patch must _not_ change the semantic
- of the function.
- + Data structures can not be patched.
- There is no support to version data structures or anyhow migrate
- one structure into another. Also the simple consistency model does
- not allow to switch more functions atomically.
- Once there is more complex consistency mode, it will be possible to
- use some workarounds. For example, it will be possible to use a hole
- for a new member because the data structure is aligned. Or it will
- be possible to use an existing member for something else.
- There are no plans to add more generic support for modified structures
- at the moment.
- + Only functions that can be traced could be patched.
- Livepatch is based on the dynamic ftrace. In particular, functions
- implementing ftrace or the livepatch ftrace handler could not be
- patched. Otherwise, the code would end up in an infinite loop. A
- potential mistake is prevented by marking the problematic functions
- by "notrace".
- + Anything inlined into __schedule() can not be patched.
- The switch_to macro is inlined into __schedule(). It switches the
- context between two processes in the middle of the macro. It does
- not save RIP in x86_64 version (contrary to 32-bit version). Instead,
- the currently used __schedule()/switch_to() handles both processes.
- Now, let's have two different tasks. One calls the original
- __schedule(), its registers are stored in a defined order and it
- goes to sleep in the switch_to macro and some other task is restored
- using the original __schedule(). Then there is the second task which
- calls patched__schedule(), it goes to sleep there and the first task
- is picked by the patched__schedule(). Its RSP is restored and now
- the registers should be restored as well. But the order is different
- in the new patched__schedule(), so...
- There is work in progress to remove this limitation.
- + Livepatch modules can not be removed.
- The current implementation just redirects the functions at the very
- beginning. It does not check if the functions are in use. In other
- words, it knows when the functions get called but it does not
- know when the functions return. Therefore it can not decide when
- the livepatch module can be safely removed.
- This will get most likely solved once a more complex consistency model
- is supported. The idea is that a safe state for patching should also
- mean a safe state for removing the patch.
- Note that the patch itself might get disabled by writing zero
- to /sys/kernel/livepatch/<patch>/enabled. It causes that the new
- code will not longer get called. But it does not guarantee
- that anyone is not sleeping anywhere in the new code.
- + Livepatch works reliably only when the dynamic ftrace is located at
- the very beginning of the function.
- The function need to be redirected before the stack or the function
- parameters are modified in any way. For example, livepatch requires
- using -fentry gcc compiler option on x86_64.
- One exception is the PPC port. It uses relative addressing and TOC.
- Each function has to handle TOC and save LR before it could call
- the ftrace handler. This operation has to be reverted on return.
- Fortunately, the generic ftrace code has the same problem and all
- this is is handled on the ftrace level.
- + Kretprobes using the ftrace framework conflict with the patched
- functions.
- Both kretprobes and livepatches use a ftrace handler that modifies
- the return address. The first user wins. Either the probe or the patch
- is rejected when the handler is already in use by the other.
- + Kprobes in the original function are ignored when the code is
- redirected to the new implementation.
- There is a work in progress to add warnings about this situation.
|