linux-kernel - [tip:core/urgent] lockdep: more robust lockdep

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <tip-c8a250058656495be02c00de61e26b017c86ef00@git.kernel.org>
Date:	Fri, 17 Apr 2009 16:03:33 GMT
From:	tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...hat.com,
	a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, peterz@...radead.org, fweisbec@...il.com,
	rostedt@...dmis.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	mingo@...e.hu
Subject: [tip:core/urgent] lockdep: more robust lockdep_map init sequence

Commit-ID:  c8a250058656495be02c00de61e26b017c86ef00
Gitweb:     http://git.kernel.org/tip/c8a250058656495be02c00de61e26b017c86ef00
Author:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
AuthorDate: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:40:49 +0200
Committer:  Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CommitDate: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 18:00:00 +0200

lockdep: more robust lockdep_map init sequence

Steven Rostedt reported:

> OK, I think I figured this bug out. This is a lockdep issue with respect
> to tracepoints.
>
> The trace points in lockdep are called all the time. Outside the lockdep
> logic. But if lockdep were to trigger an error / warning (which this run
> did) we might be in trouble. For new locks, like the dentry->d_lock, that
> are created, they will not get a name:
>
> void lockdep_init_map(struct lockdep_map *lock, const char *name,
>                       struct lock_class_key *key, int subclass)
> {
>         if (unlikely(!debug_locks))
>                 return;
>
> When a problem is found by lockdep, debug_locks becomes false. Thus we
> stop allocating names for locks. This dentry->d_lock I had, now has no
> name. Worse yet, I have CONFIG_DEBUG_VM set, that scrambles non
> initialized memory. Thus, when the trace point was hit, it had junk for
> the lock->name, and the machine crashed.

Ah, nice catch. I think we should put at least the name in regardless.

Ensure we at least initialize the trivial entries of the depmap so that
they can be relied upon, even when lockdep itself decided to pack up and
go home.

[ Impact: fix lock tracing after lockdep warnings. ]

Reported-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Acked-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
LKML-Reference: <1239954049.23397.4156.camel@...top>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>


---
 kernel/lockdep.c |   22 ++++++++++++++--------
 1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/lockdep.c b/kernel/lockdep.c
index b0f0118..accb40c 100644
--- a/kernel/lockdep.c
+++ b/kernel/lockdep.c
@@ -2490,13 +2490,20 @@ static int mark_lock(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *this,
 void lockdep_init_map(struct lockdep_map *lock, const char *name,
 		      struct lock_class_key *key, int subclass)
 {
-	if (unlikely(!debug_locks))
+	lock->class_cache = NULL;
+#ifdef CONFIG_LOCK_STAT
+	lock->cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
+#endif
+
+	if (DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(!name)) {
+		lock->name = "NULL";
 		return;
+	}
+
+	lock->name = name;
 
 	if (DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(!key))
 		return;
-	if (DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(!name))
-		return;
 	/*
 	 * Sanity check, the lock-class key must be persistent:
 	 */
@@ -2505,12 +2512,11 @@ void lockdep_init_map(struct lockdep_map *lock, const char *name,
 		DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(1);
 		return;
 	}
-	lock->name = name;
 	lock->key = key;
-	lock->class_cache = NULL;
-#ifdef CONFIG_LOCK_STAT
-	lock->cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
-#endif
+
+	if (unlikely(!debug_locks))
+		return;
+
 	if (subclass)
 		register_lock_class(lock, subclass, 1);
 }
--
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/