linux-kernel - Re: New crashes walking proc with Saturday's git

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 23 Nov 2014 16:29:53 -0500
From:	Chris Mason <clm@...com>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: New crashes walking proc with Saturday's git

On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Chris Mason <clm@...com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> 
> wrote:
>> On Sun, 23 Nov 2014, Chris Mason wrote:
>>>  On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> 
>>> wrote:
>>>  > On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 11:16:51AM -0500, Chris Mason wrote:
>>>  > >  It must be:
>>>  > >
>>>  > >  commit 6e998916dfe327e785e7c2447959b2c1a3ea4930
>>>  > >  Author: Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com>
>>>  > >  Date:   Wed Nov 12 16:58:44 2014 +0100
>>>  > >
>>>  > >     sched/cputime: Fix clock_nanosleep()/clock_gettime() 
>>> inconsistency
>>>  > >
>>>  > >  I'll do two runs to confirm, but it's the only related patch 
>>> between rc5
>>>  > > and
>>>  > >  now.
>>> 
>>>  I've adding Ingo and Stanislaw to the cc.  With
>>>  6e998916dfe327e785e7c2447959b2c1a3ea4930 reverted, I'm no longer 
>>> crashing.
>>> 
>>>  Repeating the stack trace for the new cc list.  I see the crash 
>>> with atop or
>>>  similar walkers of /proc racing against exiting programs.  Given 
>>> the NULL rip,
>>>  this line from the patch is probably broken, but it really feels 
>>> like we
>>>  should be falling over on p->sched_class and not on the 
>>> update_curr func.
>>> 
>>>  +               p->sched_class->update_curr(rq);
>>> 
>>>  I'm leaving my fork bomb running on two machines with the patch 
>>> reverted to
>>>  make sure.
>> 
>> The sched_class instances which do not have update_curr are stop_task
>> and idle. Patch below.
>> 
>> I'm sure nobody thought about the stats read code path here.
>> 
>> [ 1053.759741]  [<ffffffff81208348>] do_task_stat+0x8b8/0xb00
>> 
>> do_task_stat(()
>>  thread_group_cputime_adjusted()
>>    thread_group_cputime()
>>      task_cputime()
>>        task_sched_runtime()
>> 	if (task_current(rq, p) && task_on_rq_queued(p)) {
>>                 update_rq_clock(rq);
>>                 p->sched_class->update_curr(rq);
>>         }
>> 
>> Now if the stats are read for a stomp machine task, aka 'migration/N'
>> and that task is current on its cpu. Ooops.
>> 
>> I added the callback for idle tasks as well for completeness sake.
> 
> This does make sense, but it doesn't match with the crash being much 
> more likely during the fork bomb.  The difference is crashing within 
> a few hours vs crashing within 5 minutes.
> 
> But, maybe I just got lucky.  I'll try the patch.

11 minutes later and it's still alive.  I'll keep an eye on it and yell 
if it falls over.

-chris



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/