linux-kernel - Re: pstore: change mutex locking to spin

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]

Message-Id: <20110817142225.8645fff7.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Wed, 17 Aug 2011 14:22:25 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Don Zickus" <dzickus@...hat.com>,
	"Matthew Garrett" <mjg@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: pstore: change mutex locking to spin_locks

On Fri, 12 Aug 2011 10:54:51 -0700
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com> wrote:

> From: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
> 
> pstore was using mutex locking to protect read/write access to the
> backend plug-ins.  This causes problems when pstore is executed in
> an NMI context through panic() -> kmsg_dump().
> 
> This patch changes the mutex to a spin_lock_irqsave then also checks to
> see if we are in an NMI context.  If we are in an NMI and can't get the
> lock, just print a message stating that and blow by the locking.
> 
> All this is probably a hack around the bigger locking problem but it
> solves my current situation of trying to sleep in an NMI context.
> 
> Tested by loading the lkdtm module and executing a HARDLOCKUP which
> will cause the machine to panic inside the nmi handler.
> 
> ...
>
> +	if (in_nmi()) {
> +		is_locked = spin_trylock(&psinfo->buf_lock);
> +		if (!is_locked)
> +			pr_err("pstore dump routine blocked in NMI, may corrupt error record\n");
> +	} else
> +		spin_lock_irqsave(&psinfo->buf_lock, flags);
>  	oopscount++;
>  	while (total < kmsg_bytes) {
>  		dst = psinfo->buf;
> @@ -123,7 +131,11 @@ static void pstore_dump(struct kmsg_dumper *dumper,
>  		total += l1_cpy + l2_cpy;
>  		part++;
>  	}
> -	mutex_unlock(&psinfo->buf_mutex);
> +	if (in_nmi()) {
> +		if (is_locked)
> +			spin_unlock(&psinfo->buf_lock);
> +	} else
> +		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&psinfo->buf_lock, flags);
>  }

It's still bad if lockdep is enabled.  See
kernel/lockdep.c:lock_acquire() and lock_release().  They aren't
NMI-safe.

One approach would be to switch to bit_spin_lock().  Which will break
if/when bit spinlocks get lockdep-enabled, so don't do that.

A better approach would be to use the underlying spinlock functions
which bypass lockdep, but I cannot immediately locate those amongst
the misama of spinlock interface mess.

This problem of locking-vs-NMIs has been "solved" several times before
but I don't recall any standardized approach being developed.  Does
anyone have a favorite implementation to look at?
--
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/