linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 2/2] watchdog: update watchdog

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]

Date:	Fri, 19 Jul 2013 18:37:50 +0200
From:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
To:	Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/2] watchdog: update watchdog_tresh properly

On Fri 19-07-13 12:08:52, Don Zickus wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:04:59AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > watchdog_tresh controls how often nmi perf event counter checks per-cpu
> > hrtimer_interrupts counter and blows up if the counter hasn't changed
> > since the last check. The counter is updated by per-cpu watchdog_hrtimer
> > hrtimer which is scheduled with 2/5 watchdog_thresh period which
> > guarantees that hrtimer is scheduled 2 times per the main period. Both
> > hrtimer and perf event are started together when the watchdog is
> > enabled.
> > 
> > So far so good. But...
> > 
> > But what happens when watchdog_thresh is updated from sysctl handler?
> > 
> > proc_dowatchdog will set a new sampling period and hrtimer callback
> > (watchdog_timer_fn) will use the new value in the next round.
> > The problem, however, is that nobody tells the perf event that the
> > sampling period has changed so it is ticking with the period configured
> > when it has been set up.
> > 
> > This might result in an ear riping dissonance between perf and hrtimer
> > parts if the watchdog_thresh is increased. And even worse it might lead
> > to KABOOM if the watchdog is configured to panic on such a spurious
> > lockup.
> 
> Heh.  Good point.
> 
> What if we keep it simpler.
> 
> if (old_thresh != watchdog_thresh)
>   watchdog_disable_all_cpus()
>   wathcdog_enable_all_cpus()

Those would do nothing because of watchdog_disabled checks. It is also
much more heavy than necessary. I hope we can get a perf API which just
update the perf event period directly and we do not have to call even
watchdog_nmi_{en,dis}able

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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/