linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 05/10] signal: Introduce TRAP_PERF si_code and si

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: <43f8a3bf-34c5-0fc9-c335-7f92eaf23022@samsung.com>
Date:   Wed, 21 Apr 2021 08:21:17 +0200
From:   Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
To:     Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Matt Morehouse <mascasa@...gle.com>,
        Peter Collingbourne <pcc@...gle.com>,
        Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 05/10] signal: Introduce TRAP_PERF si_code and
 si_perf to siginfo

Hi,

On 21.04.2021 00:42, Marco Elver wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 at 23:26, Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com> wrote:
>> On 08.04.2021 12:36, Marco Elver wrote:
>>> Introduces the TRAP_PERF si_code, and associated siginfo_t field
>>> si_perf. These will be used by the perf event subsystem to send signals
>>> (if requested) to the task where an event occurred.
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> # m68k
>>> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> # asm-generic
>>> Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
>> This patch landed in linux-next as commit fb6cc127e0b6 ("signal:
>> Introduce TRAP_PERF si_code and si_perf to siginfo"). It causes
>> regression on my test systems (arm 32bit and 64bit). Most systems fails
>> to boot in the given time frame. I've observed that there is a timeout
>> waiting for udev to populate /dev and then also during the network
>> interfaces configuration. Reverting this commit, together with
>> 97ba62b27867 ("perf: Add support for SIGTRAP on perf events") to let it
>> compile, on top of next-20210420 fixes the issue.
> Thanks, this is weird for sure and nothing in particular stands out.
>
> I have questions:
> -- Can you please share your config?

This happens with standard multi_v7_defconfig (arm) or just defconfig 
for arm64.

> -- Also, can you share how you run this? Can it be reproduced in qemu?
Nothing special. I just boot my test systems and see that they are 
waiting lots of time during the udev populating /dev and network 
interfaces configuration. I didn't try with qemu yet.
> -- How did you derive this patch to be at fault? Why not just
> 97ba62b27867, given you also need to revert it?
Well, I've just run my boot tests with automated 'git bisect' and that 
was its result. It was a bit late in the evening, so I didn't analyze it 
further, I've just posted a report about the issue I've found. It looks 
that bisecting pointed to a wrong commit somehow.
> If you are unsure which patch exactly it is, can you try just
> reverting 97ba62b27867 and see what happens?

Indeed, this is a real faulty commit. Initially I've decided to revert 
it to let kernel compile (it uses some symbols introduced by this 
commit). Reverting only it on top of linux-next 20210420 also fixes the 
issue. I'm sorry for the noise in this thread. I hope we will find what 
really causes the issue.

Best regards

-- 
Marek Szyprowski, PhD
Samsung R&D Institute Poland