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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 10:21:43 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> To: Seiji Aguchi <seiji.aguchi@....com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ibm.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip] x86,trace: Add rcu_irq_enter/exit() in smp_trace_reschedule_interrupt() [ Added Peter Z. and Paul ] On Mon, 2013-06-24 at 16:21 -0400, Seiji Aguchi wrote: > Reschedule vector tracepoints may be called in cpu idle state. > This causes lockdep check warning below. > So, add rcu_irq_enter/exit() to smp_trace_reschedule_interrupt(). > > [ 50.720557] Testing event reschedule_exit: > [ 50.721349] > [ 50.721502] =============================== > [ 50.721835] [ INFO: suspicious RCU usage. ] > [ 50.722169] 3.10.0-rc6-00004-gcf910e8 #190 Not tainted > [ 50.722582] ------------------------------- > [ 50.722915] /c/kernel-tests/src/linux/arch/x86/include/asm/trace/irq_vectors.h:50 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage! > [ 50.723770] > [ 50.723770] other info that might help us debug this: > [ 50.723770] > [ 50.724385] > [ 50.724385] RCU used illegally from idle CPU! > [ 50.724385] rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 0 > [ 50.725232] RCU used illegally from extended quiescent state! > [ 50.725690] no locks held by swapper/0/0. > [ 50.726010] > [ 50.726010] stack backtrace: > [ 50.726359] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 3.10.0-rc6-00004-gcf910e8 #190 > [ 50.726965] Hardware name: Bochs Bochs, BIOS Bochs 01/01/2011 > > [ 50.727417] 00000001 00000001 79c53f04 798bd9f9 79c53f2c 79077a70 79b412c6 79b41fd1 > [ 50.728159] 00000001 00000000 79c5ef8c 87147c58 00000000 79c55800 79c53f38 79010b65 > [ 50.728849] 79c52000 79c53f7c 798c720e 79c52000 79c5ef8c 00000004 00000000 79c55800 > [ 50.729532] Call Trace: > [ 50.729730] [<798bd9f9>] dump_stack+0x16/0x18 > [ 50.730072] [<79077a70>] lockdep_rcu_suspicious+0xf2/0xfa > [ 50.730498] [<79010b65>] smp_trace_reschedule_interrupt+0x1c8/0x1d0 > [ 50.730979] [<798c720e>] trace_reschedule_interrupt+0x36/0x3c > [ 50.731214] [<7901875f>] ? native_safe_halt+0x5/0x7 > [ 50.731214] [<790085cc>] default_idle+0xb1/0x1e2 > [ 50.731214] [<79008d05>] arch_cpu_idle+0xe/0x10 > [ 50.731214] [<79069ddf>] cpu_startup_entry+0x1e4/0x2c3 > [ 50.731214] [<798adb34>] rest_init+0x12c/0x132 > [ 50.731214] [<798ada08>] ? __read_lock_failed+0x14/0x14 > [ 50.731214] [<79d309e4>] start_kernel+0x38d/0x393 > [ 50.731214] [<79d30489>] ? repair_env_string+0x51/0x51 > [ 50.731214] [<79d302c3>] i386_start_kernel+0x79/0x7d > [ 50.771947] OK > [ 50.772099] Testing event reschedule_entry: OK > > Signed-off-by: Seiji Aguchi <seiji.aguchi@....com> > --- > arch/x86/kernel/smp.c | 2 ++ > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/smp.c b/arch/x86/kernel/smp.c > index f4fe0b8..b959056 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/smp.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smp.c > @@ -268,9 +268,11 @@ void smp_reschedule_interrupt(struct pt_regs *regs) > void smp_trace_reschedule_interrupt(struct pt_regs *regs) > { > ack_APIC_irq(); > + rcu_irq_enter(); > trace_reschedule_entry(RESCHEDULE_VECTOR); > __smp_reschedule_interrupt(); > trace_reschedule_exit(RESCHEDULE_VECTOR); > + rcu_irq_exit(); The question is, should we add normal irq_enter/exit here? As that should be OK to nest. There's a comment in scheduler_ipi(): /* * Not all reschedule IPI handlers call irq_enter/irq_exit, since * traditionally all their work was done from the interrupt return * path. Now that we actually do some work, we need to make sure * we do call them. * * Some archs already do call them, luckily irq_enter/exit nest * properly. * * Arguably we should visit all archs and update all handlers, * however a fair share of IPIs are still resched only so this would * somewhat pessimize the simple resched case. */ just before it calls irq_enter(). Seems that not calling irq_enter() for the reschedule ipi interrupt is more of a legacy thing. It also states that its OK for an arch to call irq_enter() before calling this as it can nest. I wonder if we should invest time in fixing all archs and remove this irq_enter? But that's out of scope for this change. Either way, the tracepoint requires rcu but for accuracy it also requires irq_enter() (tracepoints record the irq context), thus, the tracepoint interrupt handler should be calling irq_enter() and not rcu_irq_enter() (irq_enter() calls rcu_irq_enter()) -- Steve > /* > * KVM uses this interrupt to force a cpu out of guest mode > */ -- 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