[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5551BD17.6040606@hitachi.com>
Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 17:43:03 +0900
From: Hidehiro Kawai <hidehiro.kawai.ez@...achi.com>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>,
"Hatayama, Daisuke/畑山 大輔" <d.hatayama@...fujitsu.com>,
ebiederm@...ssion.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mingo@...hat.com, bp@...e.de
Subject: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH v2] kernel/panic/kexec: fix "crash_kexec_post_notifiers"
option issue in oops path
Hi all,
What is the current status of this bug fix patch?
I think it's OK if resending Hatayama-san's patch with Ingo's.
Thanks,
(2015/03/25 2:04), Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 05:18:14PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>
>> * Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Yet the actual bug is in that commit, 'crash_kexec_post_notifiers'
>>>> was clearly not a no-op in the default case, against expectations.
>>>
>>> Hi Ingo,
>>>
>>> I did a quick test and in default case crash_kexec() runs before
>>> panic notifiers. So it does look like crash_kexec_post_notifiers is
>>> a no-op in default case.
>>>
>>> What am I missing.
>>
>> Well, look at f06e5153f4ae:
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/panic.c b/kernel/panic.c
>> index d02fa9fef46a..62e16cef9cc2 100644
>> --- a/kernel/panic.c
>> +++ b/kernel/panic.c
>> @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ static unsigned long tainted_mask;
>> static int pause_on_oops;
>> static int pause_on_oops_flag;
>> static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(pause_on_oops_lock);
>> +static bool crash_kexec_post_notifiers;
>>
>> int panic_timeout = CONFIG_PANIC_TIMEOUT;
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(panic_timeout);
>> @@ -112,9 +113,11 @@ void panic(const char *fmt, ...)
>> /*
>> * If we have crashed and we have a crash kernel loaded let it handle
>> * everything else.
>> - * Do we want to call this before we try to display a message?
>> + * If we want to run this after calling panic_notifiers, pass
>> + * the "crash_kexec_post_notifiers" option to the kernel.
>> */
>> - crash_kexec(NULL);
>> + if (!crash_kexec_post_notifiers)
>> + crash_kexec(NULL);
>>
>> /*
>> * Note smp_send_stop is the usual smp shutdown function, which
>> @@ -131,6 +134,15 @@ void panic(const char *fmt, ...)
>>
>> kmsg_dump(KMSG_DUMP_PANIC);
>>
>> + /*
>> + * If you doubt kdump always works fine in any situation,
>> + * "crash_kexec_post_notifiers" offers you a chance to run
>> + * panic_notifiers and dumping kmsg before kdump.
>> + * Note: since some panic_notifiers can make crashed kernel
>> + * more unstable, it can increase risks of the kdump failure too.
>> + */
>> + crash_kexec(NULL);
>> +
>> bust_spinlocks(0);
>>
>> if (!panic_blink)
>>
>>
>> Without knowing what crash_kexec() does, the patch looks buggy: it
>> should preserve the old behavior by default, yet it will now execute a
>> second crash_kexec() after the kmsg_dump() line.
>>
>> So the invariant change would have been to do:
>>
>> - crash_kexec(NULL);
>> + if (!crash_kexec_post_notifiers)
>> + crash_kexec(NULL);
>>
>> ...
>>
>> + if (crash_kexec_post_notifiers)
>> + crash_kexec(NULL);
>>
>> Which in the !crash_kexec_post_notifiers flag case reduces to:
>>
>> crash_kexec();
>>
>> ...
>>
>> /* NOP */
>>
>> I.e. to exactly what the kernel was doing without the patch
>> originally.
>>
>> Which is what my patch does. Nothing more, nothing less.
>
> Ok, I got it what you mean.
>
> crash_kexec() does not return if a kdump kernel is loaded. If kdump
> kernel is not loaded, then crash_kexec() returns without doing anything.
>
> I think that explains why not making second call to crash_kexec() under
> if, did not create problems. In first case it will never be called and
> in second case, it will do nothing and simply return back.
>
> But anyway, we need your patch as that's right thing to do.
>
> Thanks
> Vivek
> --
> 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/
>
>
--
Hidehiro Kawai
Hitachi, Ltd. Research & Development Group
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists