linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/5] sched: Detect call to schedule from critical entry code

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]

Date:   Mon, 5 Oct 2020 14:26:48 +0200
From:   Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>,
        Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] sched: Detect call to schedule from critical entry
 code

On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 01:23:53PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 12:49:17PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > Detect calls to schedule() between user_enter() and user_exit(). Those
> > are symptoms of early entry code that either forgot to protect a call
> > to schedule() inside exception_enter()/exception_exit() or, in the case
> > of HAVE_CONTEXT_TRACKING_OFFSTACK, enabled interrupts or preemption in
> > a wrong spot.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
> > Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>
> > Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> > Cc: Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>
> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> > ---
> >  kernel/sched/core.c | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > index 2d95dc3f4644..d31a79e073e3 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > @@ -4295,6 +4295,7 @@ static inline void schedule_debug(struct task_struct *prev, bool preempt)
> >  		preempt_count_set(PREEMPT_DISABLED);
> >  	}
> >  	rcu_sleep_check();
> > +	WARN_ON_ONCE(ct_state() == CONTEXT_USER);
> 
> 	SCHED_WARN_ON() ?

Bah! That's exactly what I was looking for.

> No point in unconditionally polluting that path. Although, per MeL, we
> should probably invest in CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG_I_MEANS_IT :/

Because CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG is often used by default on distros?

Thanks.