linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ftrace: Add missing check for existing hwlat thread

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:   Wed, 1 Aug 2018 15:40:06 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Erica Bugden <erica.bugden@...utronix.de>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de, anna-maria@...utronix.de, bigeasy@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ftrace: Add missing check for existing hwlat thread

On Wed,  1 Aug 2018 12:45:54 +0200
Erica Bugden <erica.bugden@...utronix.de> wrote:

> The hwlat tracer uses a kernel thread to measure latencies. The function
> that creates this kernel thread, start_kthread(), can be called when the
> tracer is initialized and when the tracer is explicitly enabled.
> start_kthread() does not check if there is an existing hwlat kernel
> thread and will create a new one each time it is called.
> 
> This causes the reference to the previous thread to be lost. Without the
> thread reference, the old kernel thread becomes unstoppable and
> continues to use CPU time even after the hwlat tracer has been disabled.
> This problem can be observed when a system is booted with tracing
> enabled and the hwlat tracer is configured like this:
> 
> 	echo hwlat > current_tracer; echo 1 > tracing_on
> 
> Add the missing check for an existing kernel thread in start_kthread()
> to prevent this problem. This function and the rest of the hwlat kernel
> thread setup and teardown are already serialized because they are called
> through the tracer core code with trace_type_lock held.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Erica Bugden <erica.bugden@...utronix.de>
> ---
>  kernel/trace/trace_hwlat.c | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_hwlat.c b/kernel/trace/trace_hwlat.c
> index d7c8e4e..2d9d36d 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_hwlat.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_hwlat.c
> @@ -354,6 +354,9 @@ static int start_kthread(struct trace_array *tr)
>  	struct task_struct *kthread;
>  	int next_cpu;
>  
> +	if (hwlat_kthread)
> +		return 0;
> +

This looks like it is treating the symptom and not the disease.

>  	/* Just pick the first CPU on first iteration */
>  	current_mask = &save_cpumask;
>  	get_online_cpus();

Can you try this patch?

-- Steve

diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace.c b/kernel/trace/trace.c
index 823687997b01..15862044db05 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/trace.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/trace.c
@@ -7628,7 +7628,9 @@ rb_simple_write(struct file *filp, const char __user *ubuf,
 
 	if (buffer) {
 		mutex_lock(&trace_types_lock);
-		if (val) {
+		if (!!val == tracer_tracing_is_on(tr)) {
+			val = 0; /* do nothing */
+		} else if (val) {
 			tracer_tracing_on(tr);
 			if (tr->current_trace->start)
 				tr->current_trace->start(tr);