linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 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: <20160824013314.GB452@swordfish>
Date:   Wed, 24 Aug 2016 10:33:14 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>, vlevenetz@...sol.com,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 1/2] printk: Make printk() completely async

On (08/23/16 14:19), Petr Mladek wrote:
> > the other thing I just thought of is doing something as follows
> > !!!not tested, will not compile, just an idea!!!
> > 
> > ---
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/printk/printk.c b/kernel/printk/printk.c
> > index 6e260a0..bb8d719 100644
> > --- a/kernel/printk/printk.c
> > +++ b/kernel/printk/printk.c
> > @@ -1789,6 +1789,7 @@ asmlinkage int vprintk_emit(int facility, int level,
> >         printk_delay();
> >  
> >         local_irq_save(flags);
> > +       printk_nmi_enter();
> >         this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
> 
> Huh, this looks very interesting but I am afraid that it will not fly.
> The problem is that vprintk_nmi() is safe only when it is used
> exclusively in NMI.
> 
> The following could happen with your code:

sure. I took NMI as a quick and easy example that did not require a lot
of words to explain because you guys are familiar with NMI printing.
the thing is - we don't have to share the same buffer with the actual NMI,
but instead have our own small 'alternative-printk' per-cpu buffers (a page
or two, perhaps). it's up to `printk_func' that we set up at the entry point
and flush function that we execute later. vprintk_nmi() writes to
this_cpu_ptr(&nmi_print_seq), vprintk_alter() will write to
this_cpu_ptr(&alt_print_seq), for example. the same with flushing:
printk_nmi_flush reads in from per_cpu(nmi_print_seq); alter-printk flush
can read from per_cpu(alt_print_seq).

[..]
> The lockless handling of the NMI per-CPU buffer already is not
> trivial. I would be afraid to add more hacks to make
> it writable in all contexts.

yes. we can reuse the idea of NMI printk and most of the code. the thing
we really care is `struct nmi_seq_buf' assigned to this particular CPU,
and there can be several seq_buffer-s.

> I am sorry about the bad news. This was so promising on the first
> look.

it's not dead yet ;)

	-ss