linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 12/12 v3] x86/nmi: Perform a safe NMI stack trace on all CPUs

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: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1411042343130.29198@pobox.suse.cz>
Date:	Wed, 5 Nov 2014 00:05:12 +0100 (CET)
From:	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.cz>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 12/12 v3] x86/nmi: Perform a safe NMI stack trace
 on all CPUs

On Tue, 4 Nov 2014, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> From: "Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)" <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> 
> When trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() is called on x86, it will trigger an
> NMI on each CPU and call show_regs(). But this can lead to a hard lock
> up if the NMI comes in on another printk().
> 
> In order to avoid this, when the NMI triggers, it switches the printk
> routine for that CPU to call a NMI safe printk function that records the
> printk in a per_cpu seq_buf descriptor. After all NMIs have finished
> recording its data, the trace_seqs are printed in a safe context.
> 
> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/p/20140619213952.360076309@goodmis.org
> 
> Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>

I've been running the whole machinery that used to trigger very quickly 
the complete hardlock of the machine (*) for the whole evening/night, and 
it's still running flawlessly.

Plus, as I said previously, I agree with the whole idea (given the 
general nastiness of the problem and given the fact this simply has to be 
fixed without pointless delays).

I.e FWIW

	Tested-by: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
	Acked-by: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>

for the whole series.

(*) heavy printk() workload (**) + sysrq-l in parallel
(**) iptables logging every incoming packet + flood ping from another 
     machine

Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina
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/