linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clocksource, Add warning to clocksource

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: <CALAqxLVZbqOBf7Xd5k4_euPxNLztHjmEubZys8iL4U9t9CPabQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 17 Oct 2014 11:27:19 -0700
From:	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To:	Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
Cc:	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clocksource, Add warning to clocksource_delta()
 validation code

On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 10/17/2014 02:17 PM, John Stultz wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com> wrote:
>>> A bug report came in against an older kernel which output "backward time"
>>> messages and the report noted that the upstream kernel worked.  After some
>>> investigation it turned out that one of the sockets was bad on the system
>>> and the "backward time" messages were caused by a real, but intermittent,
>>> hardware failure.
>>>
>>> Commit 09ec54429c6d10f87d1f084de53ae2c1c3a81108 ("clocksource: Move
>>> cycle_last validation to core code") modifies the x86 clocksource such that
>>> if a negative delta between two reads of time is calculated the
>>> clocksource_delta() code will return 0.  There is no warning when this
>>> occurs and there really should be one in order to catch not only hardware
>>> issues like the issue above, but potential coding issues as the code is
>>> modified.  This patch introduces a WARN() which will also dump a stack
>>> trace to the console so the exact code path can be evaluated.
>>>
>>> I tested this by booting on the broken hardware and left the system idle
>>> until a negative clocksource_delta() event occurred.
>>>
>>> Cc: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
>>> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
>>> Signed-off-by: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
>>> ---
>>>  kernel/time/timekeeping_internal.h |    7 ++++++-
>>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/kernel/time/timekeeping_internal.h b/kernel/time/timekeeping_internal.h
>>> index 4ea005a..abe6bc8 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/time/timekeeping_internal.h
>>> +++ b/kernel/time/timekeeping_internal.h
>>> @@ -17,7 +17,12 @@ static inline cycle_t clocksource_delta(cycle_t now, cycle_t last, cycle_t mask)
>>>  {
>>>         cycle_t ret = (now - last) & mask;
>>>
>>> -       return (s64) ret > 0 ? ret : 0;
>>> +       if ((s64)ret > 0)
>>> +               return ret;
>>> +
>>> +       WARN(1, "Clocksource calculated negative delta, %lld.  last = %llu, now = %llu, mask = %llx\n",
>>> +            (s64)ret, last, now, mask);
>>> +       return 0;
>>
>>
>> I realize you followed up that this wasn't finished, but just as some
>> feedback, there's a number of types of hardware where there may be a
>> very slight skew between cpu TSC, and this will briefly trigger right
>> after each timekeeping update if a system is reading the clock
>> frequently (think of the case where the update happens on the cpu
>> thats just a little bit ahead, while a timestamping loop is running on
>> a cpu that is a little bit behind).
>
> Ah, interesting.  Okay ... drop this patch then.  Thanks for the info John.

If you're wanting something that aids with debugging, maybe some sort
calmly stated warn-once in the dmesg might be ok, that or some other
flag exported via a debugging interface.

thanks
-john
--
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/