linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] x86, traps: Track entry into and exit from IST context

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, 23 Jan 2015 17:25:45 -0800
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
Cc:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
	Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] x86, traps: Track entry into and exit from IST context

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com> wrote:
> On 01/23/2015 01:34 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 09:58:01AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>>> [  543.999079] Call Trace:
>>>>> [  543.999079] dump_stack (lib/dump_stack.c:52)
>>>>> [  543.999079] lockdep_rcu_suspicious (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:4259)
>>>>> [  543.999079] atomic_notifier_call_chain (include/linux/rcupdate.h:892 kernel/notifier.c:182 kernel/notifier.c:193)
>>>>> [  543.999079] ? atomic_notifier_call_chain (kernel/notifier.c:192)
>>>>> [  543.999079] notify_die (kernel/notifier.c:538)
>>>>> [  543.999079] ? atomic_notifier_call_chain (kernel/notifier.c:538)
>>>>> [  543.999079] ? debug_smp_processor_id (lib/smp_processor_id.c:57)
>>>>> [  543.999079] do_debug (arch/x86/kernel/traps.c:652)
>>>>> [  543.999079] ? trace_hardirqs_on (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2609)
>>>>> [  543.999079] ? do_int3 (arch/x86/kernel/traps.c:610)
>>>>> [  543.999079] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2554 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2601)
>>>>> [  543.999079] debug (arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S:1310)
>>>>
>>>> I don't know how to read this stack trace.  Are we in do_int3,
>>>> do_debug, or both?  I didn't change do_debug at all.
>>>
>>> It looks like we're in do_debug. do_int3 is only on the stack but not
>>> part of the current frame if I can trust the '?' ...
>>>
>>
>> It's possible that an int3 happened and I did something wrong on
>> return that caused a subsequent do_debug to screw up, but I don't see
>> how my patch would have caused that.
>>
>> Were there any earlier log messages?
>
> Nope, nothing odd before or after.

Trinity just survived for a decent amount of time for me with my
patches, other than a bunch of apparently expected OOM kills.  I have
no idea how to tell trinity how much memory to use.

--Andy
--
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/