[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090615171845.GA7664@elte.hu>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 19:18:45 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca,
paulus@...ba.org, acme@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, penberg@...helsinki.fi,
vegard.nossum@...il.com, efault@....de, jeremy@...p.org,
npiggin@...e.de, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:perfcounters/core] perf_counter: x86: Fix call-chain
support to use NMI-safe methods
* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Jun 2009, tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > __copy_from_user_inatomic() isn't NMI safe in that it can trigger
> > the page fault handler which is another trap and its return path
> > invokes IRET which will also close the NMI context.
>
> That's not the only problem.
>
> An even more fundamental problem is that the page fault handler is
> not re-entrant because of simple the value in %cr2. So regardless
> of any 'iret' issues, you *CANNOT* take a page fault in an NMI,
> because the NMI might happen while we're in the critical region of
> having taken another page fault, but before we've saved off the
> value of %cr2 in that old page fault.
>
> If the NMI handler causes a page fault, it will corrupt the %cr2
> of the outer page fault. That's why the page fault is done with an
> interrupt gate, and why we have that conditional
> local_irq_enable() in it.
>
> So page faults are fundamentally only safe wrt normal interrupts,
> not NMI.
ahhh ... a light goes up. Indeed.
I was suspecting something much more complex: like the CPU somehow
having shadow state for attempted-fault which gets confused by
NMI->fault.
A simple cr2 corruption would explain all those cc1 SIGSEGVs and
other user-space crashes i saw, with sufficiently intense sampling -
easily.
The thing is, that __copy_user_inatomic() has been in
arch/x86/oprofile/backtrace.c for years, i didnt even suspect some
simple, fundamental flaw like this. Apparently nobody uses it.
This is really good news in a sense: i really hate that additional
entry*.S mucking in the exception path in the dont-IRET patch. We
want less entry*.S magic, not more.
Ingo
--
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