[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190507014332.l5pmvjyfropaiui2@treble>
Date: Mon, 6 May 2019 20:43:32 -0500
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>, Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>,
Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@...hat.com>,
Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
live-patching@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] livepatch: Remove duplicate warning about missing
reliable stacktrace support
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 07:40:32PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 11:10:48AM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > WARN_ON_ONCE() could not be called safely under rq lock because
> > of console deadlock issues. Fortunately, there is another check
> > for the reliable stacktrace support in klp_enable_patch().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
> > ---
> > kernel/livepatch/transition.c | 9 ++++++++-
> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/livepatch/transition.c b/kernel/livepatch/transition.c
> > index 9c89ae8b337a..8e0274075e75 100644
> > --- a/kernel/livepatch/transition.c
> > +++ b/kernel/livepatch/transition.c
> > @@ -263,8 +263,15 @@ static int klp_check_stack(struct task_struct *task, char *err_buf)
> > trace.nr_entries = 0;
> > trace.max_entries = MAX_STACK_ENTRIES;
> > trace.entries = entries;
> > +
> > ret = save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable(task, &trace);
> > - WARN_ON_ONCE(ret == -ENOSYS);
> > + /*
> > + * pr_warn() under task rq lock might cause a deadlock.
> > + * Fortunately, missing reliable stacktrace support has
> > + * already been handled when the livepatch was enabled.
> > + */
> > + if (ret == -ENOSYS)
> > + return ret;
>
> I find the comment to be a bit wordy and confusing (and vague).
>
> Also this check is effectively the same as the klp_have_reliable_stack()
> check which is done in kernel/livepatch/core.c. So I think it would be
> clearer and more consistent if the same check is done here:
>
> if (!klp_have_reliable_stack())
> return -ENOSYS;
>
> ret = save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable(task, &trace);
>
> [ no need to check ret for ENOSYS here ]
>
> Then, IMO, no comment is needed.
BTW, if you agree with this approach then we can leave the
WARN_ON_ONCE() in save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable() after all.
--
Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists