| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20081104094341.GO23790@elte.hu> Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 10:43:41 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> To: Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: use raw spinlocks instead of spinlocks * Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com> wrote: > 2008/11/3 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>: > > Frederic, do you have trouble finding the source of the deadlock? In > > theory the NMI watchdog should be able to punch through it. (if not > > then we need to improve things so that it can) > > Ok...actually I still have a deadlock. Or it seems to. I launch the > return tracer and then...the system can block after several seconds, > typically after I try to write some characters on the terminal. > > It happens more easily on SMP. > > I enabled all I could for lock debugging, but I don't have any > errors printed... Lockdep uses an NMI wachdog? lockdep works via a completely different principle: it instruments all the actual lock acquire/release calls and builds a graph of lock dependencies in the system, as it happens. It also guarantees that all the observed locking rules are followed (i.e. it proves that as long as you dont get any messages from lockdep, all the locking patterns are mathematically safe). So a lockdep message will most of the time occur much easier than a real lockup would occur - as lockdep only needs to observe inconsistent locking patterns to prove that a lockup _could_ occur. The NMI watchdog just observes the system and complains if it sees hardirqs not progressing (i.e. a hard lockup). It will detect anything that causes a hard lockup. (assuming that the NMI watchdog itself is not locked up) Regarding your lockup ... it's quite hard. Maybe you can get more output out of the system by using: earlyprintk=vga,keep plus disablig regular tty output. (i.e. not passing any 'console=tty' line to the kernel bootup.) this way you wont get any normal printk activities (which might lock up), you should only get the very simple early-printk output. it is also probably useful to mark the early-printk code notrace in arch/x86/kernel/Makefile, via the patch below. (i've just applied to to tip/x86/debug and pushed it out into tip/master) ... but that's still not a guarantee that you'll be able to debug it this way :-/ Bootstrapping something this intrusive and wide is one of the hardest kernel development activities possible. Ingo ----------------> >From 6cf87efbc7a3676e0ad7c9622ec6aec244a593bc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 10:42:23 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] x86 debug: mark early_printk.o as notrace Impact: do not do function-tracing in the early-printk code this is useful when earlyprintk=vga,keep is used to debug tracer plugins. Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> --- arch/x86/kernel/Makefile | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/Makefile b/arch/x86/kernel/Makefile index e489ff9..943fe60 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/Makefile +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/Makefile @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ CFLAGS_REMOVE_tsc.o = -pg CFLAGS_REMOVE_rtc.o = -pg CFLAGS_REMOVE_paravirt-spinlocks.o = -pg CFLAGS_REMOVE_ftrace.o = -pg +CFLAGS_REMOVE_early_printk.o = -pg endif # -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists