linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 5/7] tracing: Centralize preemptirq tracepoints and unify their usage

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: <20180711131256.GH2476@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Wed, 11 Jul 2018 15:12:56 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Julia Cartwright <julia@...com>,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Thomas Glexiner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 5/7] tracing: Centralize preemptirq tracepoints and
 unify their usage

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:21:47AM -0700, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> One note, I have to check for lockdep recursion in the code that calls
> the trace events API and bail out if we're in lockdep recursion

I'm not seeing any new lockdep_recursion checks...

> protection to prevent something like the following case: a spin_lock is
> taken. Then lockdep_acquired is called.  That does a raw_local_irq_save
> and then sets lockdep_recursion, and then calls __lockdep_acquired. In
> this function, a call to get_lock_stats happens which calls
> preempt_disable, which calls trace IRQS off somewhere which enters my
> tracepoint code and sets the tracing_irq_cpu flag to prevent recursion.
> This flag is then never cleared causing lockdep paths to never be
> entered and thus causing splats and other bad things.

Would it not be much easier to avoid that entirely, afaict all
get/put_lock_stats() callers already have IRQs disabled, so that
(traced) preempt fiddling is entirely superfluous.

---
diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
index 5fa4d3138bf1..8f5ce0048d15 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
@@ -248,12 +248,7 @@ void clear_lock_stats(struct lock_class *class)
 
 static struct lock_class_stats *get_lock_stats(struct lock_class *class)
 {
-	return &get_cpu_var(cpu_lock_stats)[class - lock_classes];
-}
-
-static void put_lock_stats(struct lock_class_stats *stats)
-{
-	put_cpu_var(cpu_lock_stats);
+	return &this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_lock_stats)[class - lock_classes];
 }
 
 static void lock_release_holdtime(struct held_lock *hlock)
@@ -271,7 +266,6 @@ static void lock_release_holdtime(struct held_lock *hlock)
 		lock_time_inc(&stats->read_holdtime, holdtime);
 	else
 		lock_time_inc(&stats->write_holdtime, holdtime);
-	put_lock_stats(stats);
 }
 #else
 static inline void lock_release_holdtime(struct held_lock *hlock)
@@ -4090,7 +4084,6 @@ __lock_contended(struct lockdep_map *lock, unsigned long ip)
 		stats->contending_point[contending_point]++;
 	if (lock->cpu != smp_processor_id())
 		stats->bounces[bounce_contended + !!hlock->read]++;
-	put_lock_stats(stats);
 }
 
 static void
@@ -4138,7 +4131,6 @@ __lock_acquired(struct lockdep_map *lock, unsigned long ip)
 	}
 	if (lock->cpu != cpu)
 		stats->bounces[bounce_acquired + !!hlock->read]++;
-	put_lock_stats(stats);
 
 	lock->cpu = cpu;
 	lock->ip = ip;