linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] hung_task:add detecting task in D state milliseconds timeout

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: <CAN_w4MWMfoDGfpON-bYHrU=KuJG2vpFj01ZbN4r-iwM4AyyuGw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 3 Jul 2020 11:18:28 +0800
From:   yang che <chey84736@...il.com>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     mcgrof@...nel.org, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] hung_task:add detecting task in D state milliseconds timeout

  my understanding, KernelShark can't trigger panic, hung_task can
trigger. According to my use,
sometimes need to trigger panic to grab ramdump to analyze lock and
memory problems.
So I want to increase this millisecond support.


Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> 于2020年7月3日周五 上午1:43写道：
>
> On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 10:08:13PM +0800, yang che wrote:
> > current hung_task_check_interval_secs and hung_task_timeout_secs
> > only supports seconds.in some cases,the TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE state
> > takes less than 1 second.The task of the graphical interface,
> > the unterruptible state lasts for hundreds of milliseconds
> > will cause the interface to freeze
>
> The primary problem I see with this patch is that writing to the
> millisecond file silently overrides the setting in the seconds file.
> If you end up redoing this patch, there needs to be one variable which
> is scaled when reading/writing the seconds file.
>
> Taking a step back though, I think this is the wrong tool for the job.
> I'm pretty sure KernelShark will do what you want without any kernel
> modifications.
>