linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH v5 1/2] printk: Make printk() completely async

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: <20160322021824.GD2279@X58A-UD3R>
Date:	Tue, 22 Mar 2016 11:18:24 +0900
From:	Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
To:	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
Cc:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v5 1/2] printk: Make printk() completely async

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 02:11:05AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (03/21/16 16:33), Jan Kara wrote:
> [..]
> > > > And by calling wake_up_process() under logbuf_lock, you actually introduce
> > > > recursion issues for printk_deferred() messages which are supposed to be
> > > > working from under rq->lock and similar. So I think you have to keep this
> > > > section outside of logbuf_lock.
> > > 
> > > hm, in_sched (printk_deferred()) messages are printed by
> > > irq work->wake_up_klogd_work_func(), not by wake_up_process()
> > > from vprintk_emit(). or am I missing something?
> > 
> > Think of following:
> > 
> > some function
> >   printk()
> >     vprintk_emit()
> >       spin_lock(&logbuf_lock);
> >       ...
> >       wake_up_process()
> >         printk_deferred()
> >           vprintk_emit() -> recursion on logbuf_lock
> 
> uh, indeed. I was more concerned about printk() calls that are
> troublemakers and are already in wake_up_process() - spin_dump()s.
> but yes, braking printk_deferred() in this case is a regression.

Already said any kind of printk() cannot work within logbuf_lock. :-(

> thanks for pointing that out. and also thanks to Byungchul.

My pleasure.