linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tracing/sched: Check preempt_count() for current when reading task->state

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:	Thu, 11 Dec 2014 07:38:11 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing/sched: Check preempt_count() for current when
 reading task->state


* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:

> 
> When recording the state of a task for the sched_switch tracepoint a check of
> task_preempt_count() is performed to see if PREEMPT_ACTIVE is set. This is
> because, technically, a task being preempted is really in the TASK_RUNNING
> state, and that is what should be recorded when tracing a sched_switch,
> even if the task put itself into another state (it hasn't scheduled out
> in that state yet).
> 
> But with the change to use per_cpu preempt counts, the
> task_thread_info(p)->preempt_count is no longer used, and instead
> task_preempt_count(p) is used.
> 
> The problem is that this does not use the current preempt count but a
> stale one from a previous sched_switch. The task_preempt_count(p) uses
> saved_preempt_count and not preempt_count(). But for tracing
> sched_switch, if p is current, we really want preempt_count().
> 
> I hit this bug when I was tracing sleep and the call from do_nanosleep()
> scheduled out in the "RUNNING" state.
> 
>            sleep-4290  [000] 537272.259992: sched_switch:         sleep:4290 [120] R ==> swapper/0:0 [120]
>            sleep-4290  [000] 537272.260015: kernel_stack:         <stack trace>
> => __schedule (ffffffff8150864a)
> => schedule (ffffffff815089f8)
> => do_nanosleep (ffffffff8150b76c)
> => hrtimer_nanosleep (ffffffff8108d66b)
> => SyS_nanosleep (ffffffff8108d750)
> => return_to_handler (ffffffff8150e8e5)
> => tracesys_phase2 (ffffffff8150c844)
> 
> After a bit of hair pulling, I found that the state was really
> TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, but the saved_preempt_count had an old PREEMPT_ACTIVE
> set and caused the sched_switch tracepoint to show it as RUNNING.
> 
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # 3.13+
> Fixes: 01028747559a "sched: Create more preempt_count accessors"
> Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> ---
>  include/trace/events/sched.h | 6 +++++-
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/trace/events/sched.h b/include/trace/events/sched.h
> index 0a68d5ae584e..13fbadcc172b 100644
> --- a/include/trace/events/sched.h
> +++ b/include/trace/events/sched.h
> @@ -97,10 +97,14 @@ static inline long __trace_sched_switch_state(struct task_struct *p)
>  	long state = p->state;
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT
> +	unsigned long pc;
> +
> +	pc = (p == current) ? preempt_count() : task_preempt_count(p);
> +
>  	/*
>  	 * For all intents and purposes a preempted task is a running task.
>  	 */
> -	if (task_preempt_count(p) & PREEMPT_ACTIVE)
> +	if (pc & PREEMPT_ACTIVE)
>  		state = TASK_RUNNING | TASK_STATE_MAX;

I really don't like the overhead around here.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/