Kernel Dev: Setting ES:DI in real mode - c

I'm working on a toy kernel for fun and education (not a class project). I'm starting work on my memory manager, so I'm trying to get the memory map from BIOS using an INT 0x15, EAX=E820 call while still in Real Mode. I'm adapting my function from the osdev wiki (here, in the section "Getting an E820 Memory Map"). However, I want this to be a function I can call from my C code, so I'm trying to change it a bit. I want it to take two arguments: a pointer to where to store the map entries, and a pointer to an integer which will be incremented by the number of entries in the table.
According to the wiki, ES:DI needs to be pointing at where the data should be stored, so I split my first argument into two (the segment selector, pointer_to_map / 16, and the offset, pointer_to_map % 16). Here's part of C code:
typedef struct SMAP_entry {
unsigned int baseL; // Base address, a QWORD
unsigned int baseH;
unsigned int lengthL; // Length, a QWORD
unsigned int lengthH;
unsigned int type; // entry type
unsigned int ACPI; // extra data from ACPI 3.0
} SMAP_entry_t;
SMAP_entry_t data[100];
kprint("Pointer: ");
kprint_int((int) data, 16);
kprint_newline();
int res = 0;
read_mem_map(((int) data) / 16, ((int) data) % 16, &res);
kprint("res: ");
kprint_int(res, 16);
kprint_newline();
Here's part of my ASM code:
; performs a INT 0x15, eax=0xE820 call to find the memory map
; inputs: the pointer to the data table / 16, the pointer % 16, a pointer to an dword (int) which will be
; incremented by the number of entries after this function returns.
; preserves: no registers except esi
read_mem_map:
mov es, [esp + 4] ; set es to the value of the first argument
mov di, [esp + 8] ; set di to the value of the second argument
That's all I'm pasting in because the program triple-faults and shuts down the VM there. By moving ret commands around, I found that the function crashes on the very first line. If I comment out the call in C, then everything works as you'd expect.
I've read through Google that there's almost never a reason to set ES:DI directly, and in the code that I've found which does, they set it to a literal. How should I set ES:DI and if I shouldn't set it directly, how should I make the C and ASM interact in the correct way?

Each of the segment registers (on 80x86) have a visible part, and several hidden fields (the segment base, the segment limit and the segment's attributes - read/write, privilege level, etc).
In protected mode; when you load a segment register the CPU uses the visible part as an index into either the GDT or LDT, and loads the segment's hidden fields from that descriptor (in the GDT or LDT).
In real mode; the CPU does something completely different - it only sets the segment base to "visible part * 16" and doesn't use any (GDT, LDT) table.
Given the fact that you're using a 32-bit pointer to the data table and a 32-bit stack pointer (e.g. mov es, [esp + 4]); I assume your C code is in 32-bit protected mode. This is completely incompatible with real mode, partly because segment loads work completely differently and partly because the default operand/address size is 32-bit and not 16-bit.
All BIOS functions are designed for real mode. They can't be used in protected mode.
Basically; I'd recommend:
pass the pointer to the data table to your assembly as a 32-bit integer/pointer (and not 2 separate 16-bit integers)
call a "go to real mode" function (which will be slightly tricky, as you'd also be switching from a 32-bit stack to a 16-bit stack and will need a "32-bit return instruction" in 16-bit code).
split the pointer to the data table into its segment and offset in assembly, and load the segment (which should work correctly as you're in real mode now)
call the BIOS function (which should work correctly as you're in real mode now)
call a "go to protected mode" function (which will be slightly tricky again, including a "16-bit return instruction" in 32-bit code).
return to the (32-bit protected mode) caller
Instructions for switching from real mode to protected mode, and switching from protected mode to real mode, are included in Intel's system programmer's guide. :)

Related

Why does the stack frame also store instructions(besides data)? What is the precise mechanism by which instructions on stack frame get executed?

Short version:
0: 48 c7 c7 ee 4f 37 45 mov $0x45374fee, %rdi
7: 68 60 18 40 00 pushq $0x401860
c: c3 retq
How can these 3 lines of instruction(0,7,c), saved in the stack frame, get executed? I thought stack frame only store data, does it also store instructions? I know data is read to registers, but how do these instructions get executed?
Long version:
I am self-studying 15-213(Computer Systems) from CMU. In the Attack lab, there is an instance (phase 2) where the stack frame gets overwritten with "attack" instructions. The attack happens by then overwriting the return address from the calling function getbuf() with the address %rsp points to, which I know is the top of the stack frame. In this case, the top of the stack frame is in turn injected with the attack code mentioned above.
Here is the question, by reading the book(CSAPP), I get the sense that the stack frame only stores data the is overflown from the registers(including return address, extra arguments, etc.). But I don't get why it can also store instructions(attack code) and be executed. How exactly did the content in the stack frame, which %rsp points to, get executed? I also know that %rsp stores the return address of the calling function, the point being it is an address, not an instruction? So exactly by which mechanism does an supposed address get executed as an instruction? I am very confused.
Edit: Here is a link to the question(4.2 level 2):
http://csapp.cs.cmu.edu/3e/attacklab.pdf
This is a post that is helpful for me in understanding: https://github.com/magna25/Attack-Lab/blob/master/Phase%202.md
Thanks for your explanation!
ret instruction gets a pointer from the current position of the stack and jumps to it. If, while in a function, you modify the stack to point to another function or piece of code that could be used maliciously, the code can return to it.
The code below doesn't necessarily compile, and it is just meant to represent the concept.
For example, we have two functions: add(), and badcode():
int add(int a, int b)
{
return a + b;
}
void badcode()
{
// Some very bad code
}
Let's also assume that we have a stack such as the below when we call add()
...
0x00....18 extra arguments
0x00....10 return address
0x00....08 saved RBP
0x00....00 local variables and etc.
...
If during the execution of add, we managed to change the return address to address of badcode(), on ret instruction we will automatically start executing badcode(). I don't know if this answer your question.
Edit:
An instruction is simply an array of numbers. Where you store them is irrelevant (mostly) to their execution. A stack is essentially an abstract data structure, it is not a special place in RAM. If your OS doesn't mark the stack as non-executable, there is nothing stopping the code on the stack from being returned to by the ret.
Edit 2:
I get the sense that the stack frame only stores data that is overflown
from the registers(including return address, extra arguments, etc.)
I do not think that you know how registers, RAM, stack, and programs are incorporated. The sense that stack frame only stores data that is overflown is incorrect.
Let's start over.
Registers are pieces of memory on your CPU. They are independent of RAM. There are mainly 8 registers on a CPU. a, c, d, b, si, di, sp, and bp. a is for accumulator and it generally used for arithmetic operations, likewise b stands for base, c stands for counter, d stands for data, si stands for source, di stands for destination, sp is the stack pointer, and bp is the base pointer.
On 16 bit computers a, b, c, d, si, di, sp, and bp are 16 bits (2 byte). The a, b, c, and d are often shown as ax, bx, cx, and dx where the x stands for extension from their original 8 bit versions. They can also be referred to as eax, ecx, edx, ebx, esi, edi, esp, ebp for 32 bit (e again stands for extended) and rax, rcx, rdx, rbx, rsi, rdi, rsp, rbp for 64 bit.
Once again these are on your CPU and are independent of RAM. CPU uses these registers to do everything that it does. You wanna add two numbers? put one of them inside ax and another one inside cx and add them.
You also have RAM. RAM (standing for Random Access Memory) is a storage device that allows you to access and modify all of its values using equal computation power or time (hence the term random access). Each value that RAM holds also has an address that determines where on the RAM this value is. CPU can use numbers and treat such numbers as addresses to access memory addresses of RAM. Numbers that are used for such purposes are called pointers.
A stack is an abstract data structure. It has a FILO (first in last out) structure which means that to access the first datum that you have stored you have to access all of the other data. To manipulate the stack CPU provides us with sp which holds the pointer to the current position of the stack, and bp which holds the top of the stack. The position that bp holds is called the top of the stack because the stack usually grows downwards meaning that if we start a stack from the memory address 0x100 and store 4 bytes in it, sp will now be at the memory address 0x100 - 4 = 0x9C. To do such operations automatically we have the push and pop instructions. In that sense a stack could be used to store any type of data regardless of the data's relation to registers are programs.
Programs are pieces of structured code that are placed on the RAM by the operating system. The operating system reads program headers and relevant information and sets up an environment for the program to run on. For each program a stack is set up, usually, some space for the heap is given, and instructions (which are the building blocks of a program) are placed in arbitrary memory locations that are either predetermined by the program itself or automatically given by the OS.
Over the years some conventions have been set to standardize CPUs. For example, on most CPU's ret instruction receives the system pointer size amount of data from the stack and jumps to it. Jumping means executing code at a particular RAM address. This is only a convention and has no relation to being overflown from registers and etc. For that reason when a function is called firstly the return address (or the current address in the program at the time of execution) is pushed onto the stack so that it could be retrieved later by ret. Local variables are also stored in the stack, along with arguments if a function has more than 6(?).
Does this help?
I know it is a long read but I couldn't be sure on what you know and what you don't know.
Yet Another Edit:
Lets also take a look at the code from the PDF:
void test()
{
int val;
val = getbuf();
printf("No exploit. Getbuf returned 0x%x\n", val);
}
Phase 2 involves injecting a small amount of code as part of your exploit string.
Within the file ctarget there is code for a function touch2 having the following C representation:
void touch2(unsigned val)
{
vlevel = 2; /* Part of validation protocol */
if (val == cookie) {
printf("Touch2!: You called touch2(0x%.8x)\n", val);
validate(2);
} else {
printf("Misfire: You called touch2(0x%.8x)\n", val);
fail(2);
}
exit(0);
}
Your task is to get CTARGET to execute the code for touch2 rather than returning to test. In this case,
however, you must make it appear to touch2 as if you have passed your cookie as its argument.
Let's think about what you need to do:
You need to modify the stack of test() so that two things happen. The first thing is that you do not return to test() but you rather return to touch2. The other thing you need to do is give touch2 an argument which is your cookie. Since you are giving only one argument you don't need to modify the stack for the argument at all. The first argument is stored on rdi as a part of x86_64 calling convention.
The final code that you write has to change the return address to touch2()'s address and also call mov rdi, cookie
Edit:
I before talked about RAM being able to store data on addresses and CPU being able to interact with them. There is a secret register on your CPU that you are not able to reach from you assembly code. This register is called ip/eip/rip. It stands for instruction pointer. This register holds a 16/32/64 bit pointer to an address on RAM. this particular address is the address that the CPU will execute in its clock cycle. With that in my we can say that what a ret instruction is doing is
pop rip
which means get the last 64 bits (8 bytes for a pointer) on the stack into this instruction pointer. Once rip is set to this value, the CPU begins executing this code. The CPU doesn't do any checks on rip whatsoever. You can technically do the following thing (excuse me, my assembly is in intel syntax):
mov rax, str ; move the RAM address of "str" into rax
push rax ; push rax into stack
ret ; return to the last pushed qword (8 bytes) on the stack
str: db "Hello, world!", 0 ; define a string
This code can call/execute a string. Your CPU will be very upset tho, that there is no valid instruction there and will probably stop working.

Why my own memcpy written on NASM can not copy more than 340000000 bytes?

I am learning nasm. I have written a simple function that copies memory from the source to the destination. I test in in C.
section .text
global _myMemcpy
_myMemcpy:
mov eax, [esp + 4]
mov ecx, [esp + 8]
add [esp + 12], eax
lp:
mov dl, [ecx]
mov [eax], dl
inc eax
inc ecx
cmp eax, [esp + 12]
jl lp
endlp:
mov eax, [esp + 4]
ret
And the C program:
#include <string.h>
#define Times 340000000
extern void* _myMemcpy(void* dest, void* src, size_t size);
char sr[Times];
char ds[Times];
int main(void)
{
memset(sr, 'a', Times);
_myMemcpy(ds, sr, Times);
return 0;
}
I am currently using Ubuntu OS. When I compile and link the two files with $ nasm -f elf m.asm && gcc -Wall -m32 m.o p.c && ./a.out it works fine when the value of Times is less than 340000000. When it is greater, _myMemcpy copies only the furst byte of the source to the destination. I can't figure out where is the problem. Every suggestion will by useful.
You're doing signed compares on pointers; don't do that. Use jne in this case since you will always reach exact equality at the exit point.
Or if you want relational compares with pointers, usually unsigned conditions like jb and jae make the most sense. (It's normal to think of virtual address space as a flat linear 4GiB with the lowest address being 0, so you need increments across the middle of that range to work).
With arrays larger than your ~300MiB size, and the default linker script for PIE executables, apparently one of them will span the 2GiB boundary between signed-positive and signed-negative1. So the end-pointer you calculate will be "negative" if you treat it as a signed integer. (Unlike on x86-64, where the non-canonical "hole" spanning the middle of virtual address-space means that an array can never span the signed-wraparound boundary: Should pointer comparisons be signed or unsigned in 64-bit x86? - sometimes it does make sense to use signed compares there.)
You should see this with a debugger if you single-step and look at the pointer values, and the memory value you create with size += dest (add [esp + 12], eax). As a signed operation, that overflows to create a negative end_pointer, while the start pointer is still positive. pos < neg is false on the first iteration, so your loop exits, you can see this when single-stepping.
Footnote 1: On my system, under GDB (which disables ASLR), after start to get the executable mapped to Linux's default base address for PIEs (2/3 of the way into the low half of the address space, i.e. 0x5555...), I checked the addresses with your test case:
sr at 0x56559040
ds at 0x6a998d40
end of ds at p /x sizeof(ds) + ds = 0x7edd8a40
So if it were much bigger, it would cross 0x80000000. That's why 340000000 avoids your bug but larger sizes reveal it.
BTW, under a 32-bit kernel, Linux defaults to a 3:1 split of address space between kernel and user-space, so even there it's possible for this to happen. But under a 64-bit kernel, 32-bit processes can have the entire 4 GiB address space to themselves. (Except for a page or two reserved by the kernel: see also Why can't I mmap(MAP_FIXED) the highest virtual page in a 32-bit Linux process on a 64-bit kernel?. That also means that forming a pointer to one-past-end of any array like you're doing (which ISO C promises is valid to do), won't wrap around and will still compare above a pointer into the object.)
This won't happen in 64-bit mode: there's enough address space to just divide it evenly between user and kernel, as well as there being a giant non-canonical hole between high and low ranges.

How avoid cache line invalidation from multiple threads writing to a shared array?

Context of the problem:
I am writing a code that creates 32 threads, and set affinity of them to each one of the 32 cores in my multi-core-multi-processor system.
Threads simply execute the RDTSCP instruction and the value is stored in a shared array at a non-overlapping position, this is the shared array:
uint64_t rdtscp_values[32];
So, every thread is going to write to the specific array position based on its core number.
Up to know, everything is working properly with the exception that I know that I may not be using the right data structure to avoid cache line bouncing.
P.S: I have checked already that my processor's cache line is 64-bytes wide.
Because I am using a simple uint64_t array, it implies that a single cache line is going to store 8 positions of this array, because of the read-ahead.
Question:
Because of this simple array, although the threads write to different indexes, my understanding tells that every write to this array will cause a cache invalidation to all other threads?
How could I create a structure that is aligned to the cache line?
EDIT 1
My system is: 2x Intel Xeon E5-2670 2.30GHz (8 cores, 16 threads)
Yes you definitely want to avoid "false sharing" and cache-line ping-pong.
But this probably doesn't make sense: if these memory locations are thread-private more often than they're collected by other threads, they should be stored with other per-thread data so you're not wasting cache footprint on 56 bytes of padding. See also Cache-friendly way to collect results from multiple threads. (There's no great answer; avoid designing a system that needs really fine-grained gathering of results if you can.)
But let's just assume for a minute that unused padding between slots for different threads is actually what you want.
Yes, you need the stride to be 64 bytes (1 cache line), but you don't actually need the 8B you're using to be at the start of each cache line. Thus, you don't need any extra alignment as long as the uint64_t objects are naturally-aligned (so they aren't split across a cache-line boundary).
It's fine if each thread is writing to the 3rd qword of its cache line instead of the 1st. OTOH, aligning to 64B makes sure nothing else is sharing a cache line with the first element, and it's easy so we might as well.
Static storage: aligning static storage is very easy in ISO C11 using alignas(), or with compiler-specific stuff.
With a struct, padding is implicit to make the size a multiple of the required alignment. Having one member with an alignment requirement implies that the whole struct requires at least that much alignment. The compiler takes care of this for you with static and automatic storage, but you have to use aligned_alloc or an alternative for over-aligned dynamic allocation.
#include <stdalign.h> // for #define alignas _Alignas for C++ compat
#include <stdint.h> // for uint64_t
// compiler knows the padding is just padding
struct { alignas(64) uint64_t v; } rdtscp_values[32];
int foo(unsigned t) {
rdtscp_values[t].v = 1;
return sizeof(rdtscp_values[0]); // yes, this is 64
}
Or with an array as suggested by # Eric Postpischil:
alignas(64) // optional, stride will still be 64B without this.
uint64_t rdtscp_values_2d[32][8]; // 8 uint64_t per cache line
void bar(unsigned t) {
rdtscp_values_2d[t][0] = 1;
}
alignas() is optional if you don't care about the whole thing being 64B aligned, just having 64B stride between elements you use. You could also use __attribute__((aligned(64))) in GNU C or C++, or __declspec(align(64)) for MSVC, using #ifdef to define an ALIGN macro that's portable across the major x86 compilers.
Either way produces the same asm. We can check compiler output to verify that we got what we wanted. I put it up on the Godbolt compiler explorer. We get:
foo: # and same for bar
mov eax, edi # zero extend 32-bit to 64-bit
shl rax, 6 # *64 is the same as <<6
mov qword ptr [rax + rdtscp_values], 1 # store 1
mov eax, 64 # return value = 64 = sizeof(struct)
ret
Both arrays are declared the same way, with the compiler requesting 64B alignment from the assembler/linker with the 3rd arg to .comm:
.comm rdtscp_values_2d,2048,64
.comm rdtscp_values,2048,64
Dynamic storage:
If the number of threads is not a compile-time constant, then you can use an aligned allocation function to get aligned dynamically-allocated memory (especially if you want to support a very high number of threads). See How to solve the 32-byte-alignment issue for AVX load/store operations?, but really just use C11 aligned_alloc. It's perfect for this, and returns a pointer that's compatible with free().
struct { alignas(64) uint64_t v; } *dynamic_rdtscp_values;
void init(unsigned nthreads) {
size_t sz = sizeof(dynamic_rdtscp_values[0]);
dynamic_rdtscp_values = aligned_alloc(nthreads*sz, sz);
}
void baz(unsigned t) {
dynamic_rdtscp_values[t].v = 1;
}
baz:
mov rax, qword ptr [rip + dynamic_rdtscp_values]
mov ecx, edi # same code as before to scale by 64 bytes
shl rcx, 6
mov qword ptr [rax + rcx], 1
ret
The address of the array is no longer a link-time constant, so there's an extra level of indirection to access it. But the pointer is read-only after it's initialized, so it will stay shared in cache in each core and reloading it when needed is very cheap.
Footnote: In the i386 System V ABI, uint64_t only has 4B-alignment inside structs by default (without alignas(8) or __attribute__((aligned(8)))), so if you put an int before a uint64_t and didn't do any alignment of the whole struct, it would be possible to get cache-line splits. But compilers align it by 8B whenever possible, so your struct-with padding is still fine.
SOLUTION
So, I followed the comments here and I must say thanks for all contributions.
Finally I got what I expected: cache lines being used properly per each thread.
Here is the shared structure:
typedef struct align_st {
uint64_t v;
uint64_t padding[7];
} align_st_t __attribute__ ((aligned (64)));
I am using a padding uint64_t padding[7] inside the structure to fill the remaining bytes in the cache line when this structure is loaded to the L1 cache. Nonetheless, I am asking to the compiler to use 64-bytes memory alignment when compiling it __attribute__ ((aligned (64))).
So, I allocate this structure dynamically based on the number of cores, using the memalign() for this:
align_st_t *al = (align_st_t*) memalign(64, n_cores * sizeof(align_st_t));
To compare it, I wrote one code version (V1) that uses these aligned mechanisms, and other code version (V2) that uses the simple array method.
By executing with perf, and I got these numbers:
V1: 7.184 cache-misses;
V2: 2.621.347 cache-misses.
P.S.: Each thread is writing 1-thousand times to the same address of the shared structure just to increase the numbers

What does each entry in the Jmp_buf structure hold?

I am running Ubuntu 9.10 (Karmic Koala), and I took a look at the jmp_buf structure which is simply an array of 12 ints. When I use setjmp, and pass in a jmp_buf structure—4 out of 12 entries are saved off. These 4 entries are the stack pointer, frame pointer, program counter and return address. What are the other 8 entries for? Are they machine-dependent? Is another entry the segment table base register? What else is needed to properly restore a thread/process's environment? I looked through the man page, other sources, but I couldn't find the assembly code for setjmp.
On MacOS X 10.6.2, the header <setjmp.h> ends up using <i386/setjmp.h>, and in there it says:
#if defined(__x86_64__)
/*
* _JBLEN is number of ints required to save the following:
* rflags, rip, rbp, rsp, rbx, r12, r13, r14, r15... these are 8 bytes each
* mxcsr, fp control word, sigmask... these are 4 bytes each
* add 16 ints for future expansion needs...
*/
#define _JBLEN ((9 * 2) + 3 + 16)
typedef int jmp_buf[_JBLEN];
typedef int sigjmp_buf[_JBLEN + 1];
#else
/*
* _JBLEN is number of ints required to save the following:
* eax, ebx, ecx, edx, edi, esi, ebp, esp, ss, eflags, eip,
* cs, de, es, fs, gs == 16 ints
* onstack, mask = 2 ints
*/
#define _JBLEN (18)
typedef int jmp_buf[_JBLEN];
typedef int sigjmp_buf[_JBLEN + 1];
#endif
You would probably find similar requirements on Linux - the jmp_buf contains enough information to store the necessary state. And, to use it, you really don't need to know what it contains; all you need to do is trust that the implementers got it correct. If you want to alter the implementation, then you do need to understand it, of course.
Note that setjmp and longjmp are very machine specific. Read Plauger's "The Standard C Library" for a discussion of some of the issues involved in implementing them. More modern chips make it harder to implement really well.
setjmp/longjmp/sigsetjmp are highly dependent on the CPU architecture, operating system, and threading model. The first two functions famously (or infamously—depending on your POV) appeared in the original Unix kernel as a "structured" way to unwind out of a failed system call, as from an i/o error or other nasty situations.
The structure's comments in /usr/include/setjmp.h (Linux Fedora) say Calling environment, plus possibly a saved signal mask. It includes /usr/include/bits/setjmp.h to declare jmp_buf to have an array of six 32-bit ints, apparently specific to the x86 family.
While I couldn't find source other than a PPC implementation, the comments there reasonably hint that FPU settings should be saved. That makes sense since failing to restore the rounding mode, default operand size, exception handling, etc. would be surprising.
It's typical of system engineers to reserve a little more space than actually needed in such a structure. A few extra bytes are hardly anything to sweat—especially considering the rarity of actual uses of setjmp/longjmp. Having too little space definitely is a hazard. The most salient reason I can think of is having extra—as opposed to being spot on—is that if the runtime library version is changed to need more space in jmp_buf, by having extra room already reserved, there's no need to recompile programs referring to it.

C - How to create a pattern in code segment to recognize it in memory dump?

I dump my RAM (a piece of it - code segment only) in order to find where is which C function being placed. I have no map file and I don't know what boot/init routines exactly do.
I load my program into RAM, then if I dump the RAM, it is very hard to find exactly where is what function. I'd like to use different patterns build in the C source, to recognize them in the memory dump.
I've tryed to start every function with different first variable containing name of function, like:
char this_function_name[]="main";
but it doesn't work, because this string will be placed in the data segment.
I have simple 16-bit RISC CPU and an experimental proprietary compiler (no GCC or any well-known). The system has 16Mb of RAM, shared with other applications (bootloader, downloader). It is almost impossible to find say a unique sequence of N NOPs or smth. like 0xABCD. I would like to find all functions in RAM, so I need unique identificators of functions visible in RAM-dump.
What would be the best pattern for code segment?
If it were me, I'd use the symbol table, e.g. "nm a.out | grep main". Get the real address of any function you want.
If you really have no symbol table, make your own.
struct tab {
void *addr;
char name[100]; // For ease of searching, use an array.
} symtab[] = {
{ (void*)main, "main" },
{ (void*)otherfunc, "otherfunc" },
};
Search for the name, and the address will immediately preceed it. Goto address. ;-)
If your compiler has inline asm you can use it to create a pattern. Write some NOP instructions which you can easily recognize by opcodes in memory dump:
MOV r0,r0
MOV r0,r0
MOV r0,r0
MOV r0,r0
How about a completely different approach to your real problem, which is finding a particular block of code: Use diff.
Compile the code once with the function in question included, and once with it commented out. Produce RAM dumps of both. Then, diff the two dumps to see what's changed -- and that will be the new code block. (You may have to do some sort of processing of the dumps to remove memory addresses in order to get a clean diff, but the order of instructions ought to be the same in either case.)
Numeric constants are placed in the code segment, encoded in the function's instructions. So you could try to use magic numbers like 0xDEADBEEF and so on.
I.e. here's the disassembly view of a simple C function with Visual C++:
void foo(void)
{
00411380 push ebp
00411381 mov ebp,esp
00411383 sub esp,0CCh
00411389 push ebx
0041138A push esi
0041138B push edi
0041138C lea edi,[ebp-0CCh]
00411392 mov ecx,33h
00411397 mov eax,0CCCCCCCCh
0041139C rep stos dword ptr es:[edi]
unsigned id = 0xDEADBEEF;
0041139E mov dword ptr [id],0DEADBEEFh
You can see the 0xDEADBEEF making it into the function's source. Note that what you actually see in the executable depends on the endianness of the CPU (tx. Richard).
This is a x86 example. But RISC CPUs (MIPS, etc) have instructions moving immediates into registers - these immediates can have special recognizable values as well (although only 16-bit for MIPS, IIRC).
Psihodelia - it's getting harder and harder to catch your intention. Is it just a single function you want to find? Then can't you just place 5 NOPs one after another and look for them? Do you control the compiler/assembler/linker/loader? What tools are at your disposal?
As you noted, this:
char this_function_name[]="main";
... will end up setting a pointer in your stack to a data segment containing the string. However, this:
char this_function_name[]= { 'm', 'a', 'i', 'n' };
... will likely put all these bytes in your stack so you will be able to recognize the string in your code (I just tried it on my platform).
Hope this helps
Why not get each function to dump its own address. Something like this:
void* fnaddr( char* fname, void* addr )
{
printf( "%s\t0x%p\n", fname, addr ) ;
return addr ;
}
void test( void )
{
static void* fnaddr_dummy = fnaddr( __FUNCTION__, test ) ;
}
int main (int argc, const char * argv[])
{
static void* fnaddr_dummy = fnaddr( __FUNCTION__, main ) ;
test() ;
test() ;
}
By making fnaddr_dummy static, the dump is done once per-function. Obviously you would need to adapt fnaddr() to support whatever output or logging means you have on your system. Unfortunately, if the system performs lazy initialisation, you'll only get the addresses of the functions that are actually called (which may be good enough).
You could start each function with a call to the same dummy function like:
void identifyFunction( unsigned int identifier)
{
}
Each of your functions would call the identifyFunction-function with a different parameter (1, 2, 3, ...). This will not give you a magic mapfile, but when you inspect the code dump you should be able to quickly find out where the identifyFunction is because there will be lots of jumps to that address. Next scan for those jump and check before the jump to see what parameter is passed. Then you can make your own mapfile. With some scripting this should be fairly automatic.

Resources