linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 05/11] task_isolation: add debug boot flag

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: <20151008162805.7e4a4f25@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 8 Oct 2015 16:28:05 -0400
From:	Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@...hat.com>
To:	Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...hip.com>
Cc:	Gilad Ben Yossef <giladb@...hip.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 05/11] task_isolation: add debug boot flag

On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 20:33:56 -0400
Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...hip.com> wrote:

> On 10/5/2015 1:07 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> > On Mon, 28 Sep 2015 11:17:20 -0400
> > Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...hip.com> wrote:
> >
> >> The new "task_isolation_debug" flag simplifies debugging
> >> of TASK_ISOLATION kernels when processes are running in
> >> PR_TASK_ISOLATION_ENABLE mode.  Such processes should get no
> >> interrupts from the kernel, and if they do, when this boot flag is
> >> specified a kernel stack dump on the console is generated.
> >>
> >> It's possible to use ftrace to simply detect whether a task_isolation
> >> core has unexpectedly entered the kernel.  But what this boot flag
> >> does is allow the kernel to provide better diagnostics, e.g. by
> >> reporting in the IPI-generating code what remote core and context
> >> is preparing to deliver an interrupt to a task_isolation core.
> >>
> >> It may be worth considering other ways to generate useful debugging
> >> output rather than console spew, but for now that is simple and direct.
> > Honest question: does any of the task_isolation_debug() calls added
> > by this patch take care of the case where vmstat_shepherd() may
> > schedule vmstat_update() to run because a TASK_ISOLATION process is
> > changing memory stats?
> 
> The task_isolation_debug() calls don't "take care of" any cases - they are
> really just there to generate console dumps when the kernel unexpectedly
> interrupts a task_isolated task.
> 
> The idea with vmstat is that before a task_isolated task returns to
> userspace, it quiesces the vmstat thread (does a final sweep to collect
> the stats and turns off the scheduled work item).  As a result, the vmstat
> shepherd won't run while the task is in userspace.  When and if it returns
> to the kernel, it will again sweep up the stats before returning to userspace.
> 
> The usual shepherd mechanism on a housekeeping core might notice
> that the task had entered the kernel and started changing stats, and
> might then asynchronously restart the scheduled work, but it should be
> quiesced again regardless on the way back out to userspace.

OK, I've missed the (obvious) fact that the process has to enter the
kernel to change stats. Thanks a lot for your explanation.

> > If that's not taken care of yet, should we? I just don't know if we
> > should call task_isolation_exception() or task_isolation_debug().
> 
> task_isolation_exception() is called when an exception (page fault or
> similar) is generated synchronously by the running task and we want
> to make sure to notify the task with a signal if it has set up STRICT mode
> to indicate that it is not planning to enter the kernel.
> 
> > In the case of the latter, wouldn't it be interesting to add it to
> > __queue_work() then?
> 
> Well, queuing remote work involves sending an IPI, and we already tag
> both the SMP send side AND the client side IRQ side with a task_isolation_debug(),
> so I expect in practice it would be detected.
> 

--
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/