| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <87aa0zty4r.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 11:44:04 +0900
From: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use test_and_clear_bit() instead atomic_dec_and_test() for stop_machine
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> writes:
> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 03:11:48AM +0900, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
>> [forgot to Cc: lkml, resend]
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Maybe, nobody using debug patch in atomic_dec_and_test()... Well,
>> anyway, how about this?
>
> What debug patch?
It is this patch. I got this from -mm (akpm series), I don't know
whether -mm is still using though.
The patch below will detect atomic counter underflows. This has been
test-driven in the -RT patchset for some time. qdisc_destroy() triggered
it sometimes (in a seemingly nonfatal way, during device shutdown) - with
DaveM suggesting that it is most likely a bug in the networking code. So
it would be nice to have this in -mm for some time to validate all atomic
counters on a broader base.
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
---
Change it to atomic check.
Signed-off-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
---
arch/x86/include/asm/atomic.h | 13 +++++++++++++
arch/x86/include/asm/atomic64_32.h | 5 ++++-
arch/x86/include/asm/atomic64_64.h | 12 ++++++++++++
3 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff -puN arch/x86/include/asm/atomic.h~debug_atomic_t-underflows-atomic arch/x86/include/asm/atomic.h
--- linux/arch/x86/include/asm/atomic.h~debug_atomic_t-underflows-atomic 2012-04-03 17:29:38.000000000 +0900
+++ linux-hirofumi/arch/x86/include/asm/atomic.h 2012-04-03 17:29:38.000000000 +0900
@@ -6,6 +6,18 @@
#include <asm/processor.h>
#include <asm/alternative.h>
#include <asm/cmpxchg.h>
+#include <asm/bug.h>
+
+#define ATOMIC_UNDERFLOW_CHECK(v) do { \
+ unsigned char __sf; \
+ /* if (atomic_read(v) < 0) */ \
+ __asm__ __volatile__("sets %0" \
+ : "=qm" (__sf) \
+ : /* no input */ \
+ : "memory"); \
+ WARN(__sf, KERN_ERR "atomic counter underflow: %d\n", \
+ atomic_read(v)); \
+} while(0)
/*
* Atomic operations that C can't guarantee us. Useful for
@@ -123,6 +135,7 @@ static inline int atomic_dec_and_test(at
asm volatile(LOCK_PREFIX "decl %0; sete %1"
: "+m" (v->counter), "=qm" (c)
: : "memory");
+ ATOMIC_UNDERFLOW_CHECK(v);
return c != 0;
}
diff -puN arch/x86/include/asm/atomic64_32.h~debug_atomic_t-underflows-atomic arch/x86/include/asm/atomic64_32.h
--- linux/arch/x86/include/asm/atomic64_32.h~debug_atomic_t-underflows-atomic 2012-04-03 17:29:38.000000000 +0900
+++ linux-hirofumi/arch/x86/include/asm/atomic64_32.h 2012-04-03 17:29:38.000000000 +0900
@@ -244,7 +244,10 @@ static inline void atomic64_dec(atomic64
*/
static inline int atomic64_dec_and_test(atomic64_t *v)
{
- return atomic64_dec_return(v) == 0;
+ long long ret = atomic64_dec_return(v);
+ WARN(ret < 0, KERN_ERR "atomic counter underflow: %lld\n",
+ atomic64_read(v));
+ return ret == 0;
}
/**
diff -puN arch/x86/include/asm/atomic64_64.h~debug_atomic_t-underflows-atomic arch/x86/include/asm/atomic64_64.h
--- linux/arch/x86/include/asm/atomic64_64.h~debug_atomic_t-underflows-atomic 2012-04-03 17:29:38.000000000 +0900
+++ linux-hirofumi/arch/x86/include/asm/atomic64_64.h 2012-04-03 17:29:38.000000000 +0900
@@ -5,6 +5,17 @@
#include <asm/alternative.h>
#include <asm/cmpxchg.h>
+#define ATOMIC64_UNDERFLOW_CHECK(v) do { \
+ unsigned char __sf; \
+ /* if (atomic64_read(v) < 0) */ \
+ __asm__ __volatile__("sets %0" \
+ : "=qm" (__sf) \
+ : /* no input */ \
+ : "memory"); \
+ WARN(__sf, KERN_ERR "atomic counter underflow: %ld\n", \
+ atomic64_read(v)); \
+} while(0)
+
/* The 64-bit atomic type */
#define ATOMIC64_INIT(i) { (i) }
@@ -121,6 +132,7 @@ static inline int atomic64_dec_and_test(
asm volatile(LOCK_PREFIX "decq %0; sete %1"
: "=m" (v->counter), "=qm" (c)
: "m" (v->counter) : "memory");
+ ATOMIC64_UNDERFLOW_CHECK(v);
return c != 0;
}
_
>> stop_machine_first is just to see if it is first one or not. So, there
>> is no reason to use atomic_dec_and_test(), and makes the value below 0.
>>
>> I think it is not desirable, because this usage only triggers
>> atomic_dec_and_test() underflow debug patch. (the patch tests result
>> of atomic_dec_and_test() is < 0)
>
> Well it should only underflow if you have a box with more than 2 billion
> CPUs.
It meant < 0, not underflow INT_MIN.
>> -static atomic_t stop_machine_first;
>> +static unsigned long stop_machine_first;
>
> The down side to this is that it adds 4 more bytes on a 64bit
> machine. (sizeof(unsigned log) == 8 and sizeof(atomic_t) == 4)
Oh, sure. If nobody has interest, unfortunately I will use this as my
local patch...
Thanks.
--
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
--
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