linux-kernel - Re: S4 resume broken since 2.6.39 (3.1, too)

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: <s5hfwjogb53.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
Date:	Thu, 22 Sep 2011 11:49:12 +0200
From:	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, oneukum@...e.de, x86@...nel.org,
	Linux PM mailing list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: S4 resume broken since 2.6.39 (3.1, too)

At Wed, 21 Sep 2011 20:48:22 +0200,
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Tuesday, September 20, 2011, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > during testing 3.0.4 kernels, I found that the S4 is broken in recent
> > kernels since 2.6.39.  The symptom is that the machine suddenly
> > reboots after the S4 resume image is read.  This happens only
> > occasionally, usually within 10 or 20 S4 cycles.  The problem is still
> > found in 3.1-rc6.
> 
> Well, this sounds like a serious regression to me.

Yeah, it's bad :)
Note that we've checked this bug only in userland hibernate used
in SUSE distros.


> > After a bisection, the likely culprit is:
> >     commit 4b239f458c229de044d6905c2b0f9fe16ed9e01e
> >     Author: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
> >     Date:   Fri Dec 17 16:58:28 2010 -0800
> > 
> >     x86-64, mm: Put early page table high
> >
> > And the essential revert to fix the problem is like below.
> > It reverts the memory assignment in the old way, and the diff of dmesg
> > is something like:
> > 
> > @@ -49,10 +49,10 @@
> >  Base memory trampoline at [ffff880000098000] 98000 size 20480
> >  init_memory_mapping: 0000000000000000-000000007a000000
> >   0000000000 - 007a000000 page 2M
> > -kernel direct mapping tables up to 7a000000 @ 7913f000-79142000
> > +kernel direct mapping tables up to 7a000000 @ 1fffd000-20000000
> >  init_memory_mapping: 0000000100000000-0000000100600000
> >   0100000000 - 0100600000 page 2M
> > -kernel direct mapping tables up to 100600000 @ 1005fa000-100600000
> > +kernel direct mapping tables up to 100600000 @ 7913c000-79142000
> >  RAMDISK: 36d36000 - 37ff0000
> >  ACPI: RSDP 00000000000f2f10 00024 (v02 HPQOEM)
> >  ACPI: XSDT 0000000079ffe120 00094 (v01 HPQOEM SLIC-MPC 00000004      01000013)
> > @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@
> >  No NUMA configuration found
> >  Faking a node at 0000000000000000-0000000100600000
> >  Initmem setup node 0 0000000000000000-0000000100600000
> > -  NODE_DATA [00000001005d3000 - 00000001005f9fff]
> > +  NODE_DATA [00000001005d9000 - 00000001005fffff]
> >   [ffffea0000000000-ffffea00039fffff] PMD -> [ffff880076a00000-ffff8800787fffff] on node 0
> >  Zone PFN ranges:
> >    DMA      0x00000010 -> 0x00001000
> > 
> > And S4 seems working more stably now.
> > 
> > I still have no idea why the commit above introduced the buggy
> > behavior.  Through a quick look at the output above, the assigned
> > areas look OK...
> > 
> > Can anyone give a deeper insight?
> > 
> > 
> > thanks,
> > 
> > Takashi
> > 
> > ---
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/init.c b/arch/x86/mm/init.c
> > index 3032644..87488b9 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/mm/init.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/init.c
> > @@ -63,9 +63,8 @@ static void __init find_early_table_space(unsigned long end, int use_pse,
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
> >  	/* for fixmap */
> >  	tables += roundup(__end_of_fixed_addresses * sizeof(pte_t), PAGE_SIZE);
> > -
> > -	good_end = max_pfn_mapped << PAGE_SHIFT;
> >  #endif
> > +	good_end = max_pfn_mapped << PAGE_SHIFT;
> >  
> >  	base = memblock_find_in_range(start, good_end, tables, PAGE_SIZE);
> >  	if (base == MEMBLOCK_ERROR)
> 
> It looks like init_memory_mapping() is sometimes called with "end"
> beyond the last mapped PFN and it explodes when we try to write stuff to
> that address during image restoration.
> 
> IOW, the Yinghai's assumption that init_memory_mapping() would always be
> called with a "good end" on x86_64 was overomptimistic.

That was my wild guess, too.

A strange thing is that I couldn't reproduce the problem during
bisection in the commit point 4b239f458c229 itself, which is based
on 2.6.37-rc2.  The problem appeared first at the merge commit.
So, the patch itself might be working with 2.6.37, but somehow broken
with 2.6.39 merge.  Other changes might conflict with this and lead
to unexpected S4 breakage?

Well, I'll need to double-check whether the commit with 2.6.37 really
works again if necessary...


thanks,

Takashi
--
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/