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: <20200228105836.GA2913504@kroah.com>
Date:   Fri, 28 Feb 2020 11:58:36 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
        Lech Perczak <l.perczak@...lintechnologies.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Krzysztof Drobiński 
        <k.drobinski@...lintechnologies.com>,
        Pawel Lenkow <p.lenkow@...lintechnologies.com>,
        John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: Regression in v4.19.106 breaking waking up of readers of
 /proc/kmsg and /dev/kmsg

On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 11:04:16AM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Fri 2020-02-28 12:13:06, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > Cc-ing Petr, Steven, John
> > 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/e9358218-98c9-2866-8f40-5955d093dc1b@camlintechnologies.com
> > 
> > On (20/02/27 14:08), Lech Perczak wrote:
> > > W dniu 27.02.2020 o 13:39, Lech Perczak pisze:
> > > > W dniu 27.02.2020 o 13:36, Greg Kroah-Hartman pisze:
> > > >> On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 11:09:49AM +0000, Lech Perczak wrote:
> > > >>> Hello,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> After upgrading kernel on our boards from v4.19.105 to v4.19.106 we found out that syslog fails to read the messages after ones read initially after opening /proc/kmsg just after booting.
> > > >>> I also found out, that output of 'dmesg --follow' also doesn't react on new printks appearing for whatever reason - to read new messages, reopening /proc/kmsg or /dev/kmsg was needed.
> > > >>> I bisected this down to commit 15341b1dd409749fa5625e4b632013b6ba81609b ("char/random: silence a lockdep splat with printk()"), and reverting it on top of v4.19.106 restored correct behaviour.
> > > >> That is really really odd.
> > > > Very odd it is indeed.
> > > >>> My test scenario for bisecting was:
> > > >>> 1. run 'dmesg --follow' as root
> > > >>> 2. run 'echo t > /proc/sysrq-trigger'
> > > >>> 3. If trace appears in dmesg output -> good, otherwise, bad. If trace doesn't appear in output of 'dmesg --follow', re-running it will show the trace.
> > > >>>
> 
> I have reproduced the problem with a kernel based on v4.19.106
> and I see the following in the log:
> 
> [    0.028250] clocksource: refined-jiffies: mask: 0xffffffff max_cycles: 0xffffffff, max_idle_ns: 7645519600211568 ns
> [    0.028263] random: get_random_bytes called from start_kernel+0x9e/0x4f6 with crng_init=0
> [    0.028268] setup_percpu: NR_CPUS:8192 nr_cpumask_bits:4 nr_cpu_ids:4 nr_node_ids:1
> [    0.028407] percpu: Embedded 44 pages/cpu s142216 r8192 d29816 u524288
> [    0.028411] pcpu-alloc: s142216 r8192 d29816 u524288 alloc=1*2097152
> [    0.028412] pcpu-alloc: [0] 0 1 2 3 
> 
> Note that percpu stuff is initialized after printk_deferred(). And the
> deferred console is scheduled by:
> 
> void defer_console_output(void)
> {
> 	preempt_disable();
> 	__this_cpu_or(printk_pending, PRINTK_PENDING_OUTPUT);
> 	irq_work_queue(this_cpu_ptr(&wake_up_klogd_work));
> 	preempt_enable();
> }
> 
> I am afraid that the patch creates some mess via the non-initialized
> per-cpu variable.
> 
> I see that x86 has some support for EARLY_PER_CPU stuff but it seems
> to be arch-specific.
> 
> I do not see a reliable way to detect when per-cpu variables are
> initialized. Adding Tejun and PeterZ into CC if they have any
> idea.
> 
> I suggest to revert the patch until we have some easy and safe solution.

Ok, I'll do so, but why is this not an issue in 5.4.y and newer kernels?

thanks,

greg k-h

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ