[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200430191434.GC8135@suse.de>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 21:14:34 +0200
From: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Shile Zhang <shile.zhang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Tzvetomir Stoyanov <tz.stoyanov@...il.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] x86/mm: Sync all vmalloc mappings before text_poke()
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 12:11:36PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> bool trace_event_ignore_this_pid(struct trace_event_file *trace_file)
> {
> struct trace_array *tr = trace_file->tr;
> struct trace_array_cpu *data;
> struct trace_pid_list *no_pid_list;
> struct trace_pid_list *pid_list;
>
> pid_list = rcu_dereference_raw(tr->filtered_pids);
> no_pid_list = rcu_dereference_raw(tr->filtered_no_pids);
>
> if (!pid_list && !no_pid_list)
> return false;
>
> data = this_cpu_ptr(tr->array_buffer.data);
>
> return data->ignore_pid;
> }
>
> [...]
>
> tl;dr; It's not an issue with the vmalloc, it's an issue with per_cpu
> allocations!
Yes, looks like you are right, it faults on the return statement, so the
data-pointer seems not to be mapped. I looked at another instance:
The trapping instruction is:
movzbl 0x7c(%rax),%eax
Which is a pointer-dereference, with %rax=0xffffe8ffffccc870. The 'data'
pointer is allocated with alloc_percpu().
And alloc_percpu() calls down into pcpu_alloc(), which allocates new
percpu chunks using vmalloc() on x86. And there we are again in the
vmalloc area.
Regards,
Joerg
Powered by blists - more mailing lists