linux-kernel - [PATCH] watchdog: touch_nmi_watchdog should only touch local cpu not every one

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1288919932-1857-1-git-send-email-dzickus@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu,  4 Nov 2010 21:18:52 -0400
From:	Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
To:	fweisbec@...il.com, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com,
	Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH] watchdog:  touch_nmi_watchdog should only touch local cpu not every one

I ran into a scenario where while one cpu was stuck and should have panic'd
because of the NMI watchdog, it didn't.  The reason was another cpu was spewing
stack dumps on to the console.  Upon investigation, I noticed that when writing
to the console and also when dumping the stack, the watchdog is touched.

This causes all the cpus to reset their NMI watchdog flags and the 'stuck' cpu
just spins forever.

This change causes the semantics of touch_nmi_watchdog to be changed slightly.
Previously, I accidentally changed the semantics and we noticed there was a
codepath in which touch_nmi_watchdog could be touched from a preemtible area.
That caused a BUG() to happen when CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT was enabled.  I believe
it was the acpi code.

My attempt here re-introduces the change to have the touch_nmi_watchdog() code
only touch the local cpu instead of all of the cpus.  But instead of using
__get_cpu_var(), I use the __raw_get_cpu_var() version.

This avoids the preemption problem.  However my reasoning wasn't because I was
trying to be lazy.  Instead I rationalized it as, well if preemption is enabled
then interrupts should be enabled to and the NMI watchdog will have no reason
to trigger.  So it won't matter if the wrong cpu is touched because the percpu
interrupt counters the NMI watchdog uses should still be incrementing.

Signed-off-by: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
---
 kernel/watchdog.c |   17 ++++++++++++++++-
 1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
index dc8e168..dd0c140 100644
--- a/kernel/watchdog.c
+++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
@@ -141,6 +141,21 @@ void touch_all_softlockup_watchdogs(void)
 #ifdef CONFIG_HARDLOCKUP_DETECTOR
 void touch_nmi_watchdog(void)
 {
+	/*
+	 * Using __raw here because some code paths have
+	 * preemption enabled.  If preemption is enabled
+	 * then interrupts should be enabled too, in which
+	 * case we shouldn't have to worry about the watchdog
+	 * going off.
+	 */
+	__raw_get_cpu_var(watchdog_nmi_touch) = true;
+
+	touch_softlockup_watchdog();
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(touch_nmi_watchdog);
+
+void touch_all_nmi_watchdogs(void)
+{
 	if (watchdog_enabled) {
 		unsigned cpu;

@@ -151,7 +166,7 @@ void touch_nmi_watchdog(void)
 	}
 	touch_softlockup_watchdog();
 }
-EXPORT_SYMBOL(touch_nmi_watchdog);
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(touch_all_nmi_watchdogs);

 #endif

-- 
1.7.2.3

--
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/