Re: [PATCH] ftrace: Take trace_array reference before accessing its ftrace_ops
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
Date: 2026-08-28 20:13:10
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider: - [Critical] Tracefs lockdown and tracing_disabled checks are bypassed for the global ftrace instance and stack tracer. - [High] Module and probe filters for the global ftrace instance cannot be cleared or read. -- commit 42c008f904dcd516dc1681a548fae6a4bba9a162 Author: Steven Rostedt [off-list ref] ftrace: Take trace_array reference before accessing its ftrace_ops The trace instance files set_ftrace_filter and set_ftrace_notrace are updated to work with specific trace instances (trace_arrays). This patch passes the trace_array as the file private data to allow incrementing its reference before touching the ftrace_ops, preventing a use-after-free. Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/apGORjltZgAiAYHT@gmail.com/ (local)
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/kernel/trace/ftrace.c b/kernel/trace/ftrace.c index f9d80c7bd9f16..4babd86c7be00 100644 --- a/kernel/trace/ftrace.c +++ b/kernel/trace/ftrace.c
[ ... ]
int
-ftrace_regex_open(struct ftrace_ops *ops, int flag,
+ftrace_regex_open(struct trace_array *tr, struct ftrace_ops *ops, int flag,
struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
{
- struct ftrace_iterator *iter;
+ struct ftrace_iterator *iter = NULL;
struct ftrace_hash *hash;
struct list_head *mod_head;
- struct trace_array *tr = ops->private;
- int ret = -ENOMEM;
-
- ftrace_ops_init(ops);
+ int ret = -ENODEV;
if (unlikely(ftrace_disabled))
return -ENODEV;
- if (tracing_check_open_get_tr(tr))
+ if (tr && tracing_check_open_get_tr(tr))
return -ENODEV;[Severity: Critical] By adding the `tr &&` short-circuit here, does this cause a regression where tracefs lockdown and tracing_disabled checks are bypassed for the global ftrace instance and the stack tracer? Since `tr` is explicitly passed as `NULL` for these instances, `tracing_check_open_get_tr(NULL)` is never called. [ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -4788,21 +4801,19 @@ ftrace_regex_open(struct ftrace_ops *ops, int flag, static int ftrace_filter_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file) { - struct ftrace_ops *ops = inode->i_private; + struct trace_array *tr = inode->i_private; - /* Checks for tracefs lockdown */ - return ftrace_regex_open(ops, - FTRACE_ITER_FILTER | FTRACE_ITER_DO_PROBES, - inode, file); + return ftrace_regex_open(tr, NULL, + FTRACE_ITER_FILTER | FTRACE_ITER_DO_PROBES, + inode, file); }
[Severity: High]
For the global ftrace instance, `tr` is `NULL`. Does passing `NULL` for `tr`
break the module and probe filters?
In `ftrace_regex_open()`, the `mod_head` pointer is initialized like this:
mod_head = tr ? &tr->mod_trace : NULL;
Because `tr` is `NULL`, `mod_head` will also be `NULL`. When opening the
file with `O_TRUNC`, `clear_ftrace_mod_list(mod_head)` will do nothing,
failing to clear the module filters.
Additionally, `iter->tr` is set to `NULL`. When reading the file,
`t_mod_start()` relies on `iter->tr` and will return early:
/* probes are only available if tr is set */
if (!iter->tr)
return NULL;
Could this skip the enumeration of active module and probe filters for the
global instance entirely?
[ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c b/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c index 0aa2514a6593b..e7f4e523587d0 100644 --- a/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c@@ -499,7 +499,7 @@ stack_trace_filter_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file) struct ftrace_ops *ops = inode->i_private; /* Checks for tracefs lockdown */ - return ftrace_regex_open(ops, FTRACE_ITER_FILTER, + return ftrace_regex_open(NULL, ops, FTRACE_ITER_FILTER, inode, file); }
[Severity: Critical] The stack tracer explicitly passes `NULL` for the trace array. Due to the short-circuit mentioned earlier, doesn't this also bypass the lockdown check documented in the comment right above this call? -- Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260828155942.445f46e5@gandalf.local.home?part=1