linux-kernel - [PATCH 5.11 110/329] watchdog/softlockup: remove logic that tried to prevent repeated reports

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, 17 May 2021 16:00:21 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Laurence Oberman <loberman@...hat.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Vincent Whitchurch <vincent.whitchurch@...s.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5.11 110/329] watchdog/softlockup: remove logic that tried to prevent repeated reports

From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>

[ Upstream commit 1bc503cb4a2638fb1c57801a7796aca57845ce63 ]

The softlockup detector does some gymnastic with the variable
soft_watchdog_warn.  It was added by the commit 58687acba59266735ad
("lockup_detector: Combine nmi_watchdog and softlockup detector").

The purpose is not completely clear.  There are the following clues.  They
describe the situation how it looked after the above mentioned commit:

  1. The variable was checked with a comment "only warn once".

  2. The variable was set when softlockup was reported. It was cleared
     only when the CPU was not longer in the softlockup state.

  3. watchdog_touch_ts was not explicitly updated when the softlockup
     was reported. Without this variable, the report would normally
     be printed again during every following watchdog_timer_fn()
     invocation.

The logic has got even more tangled up by the commit ed235875e2ca98
("kernel/watchdog.c: print traces for all cpus on lockup detection").
After this commit, soft_watchdog_warn is set only when
softlockup_all_cpu_backtrace is enabled.  But multiple reports from all
CPUs are prevented by a new variable soft_lockup_nmi_warn.

Conclusion:

The variable probably never worked as intended.  In each case, it has not
worked last many years because the softlockup was reported repeatedly
after the full period defined by watchdog_thresh.

The reason is that watchdog gets touched in many known slow paths, for
example, in printk_stack_address().  This code is called also when
printing the softlockup report.  It means that the watchdog timestamp gets
updated after each report.

Solution:

Simply remove the logic. People want the periodic report anyway.

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210311122130.6788-5-pmladek@suse.com
Signed-off-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Laurence Oberman <loberman@...hat.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Vincent Whitchurch <vincent.whitchurch@...s.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
---
 kernel/watchdog.c | 14 ++------------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
index 7776d53a015c..122e272ad7f2 100644
--- a/kernel/watchdog.c
+++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
@@ -172,7 +172,6 @@ static u64 __read_mostly sample_period;
 static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, watchdog_touch_ts);
 static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct hrtimer, watchdog_hrtimer);
 static DEFINE_PER_CPU(bool, softlockup_touch_sync);
-static DEFINE_PER_CPU(bool, soft_watchdog_warn);
 static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, hrtimer_interrupts);
 static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, hrtimer_interrupts_saved);
 static unsigned long soft_lockup_nmi_warn;
@@ -394,19 +393,12 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart watchdog_timer_fn(struct hrtimer *hrtimer)
 		if (kvm_check_and_clear_guest_paused())
 			return HRTIMER_RESTART;
 
-		/* only warn once */
-		if (__this_cpu_read(soft_watchdog_warn) == true)
-			return HRTIMER_RESTART;
-
 		if (softlockup_all_cpu_backtrace) {
 			/* Prevent multiple soft-lockup reports if one cpu is already
 			 * engaged in dumping cpu back traces
 			 */
-			if (test_and_set_bit(0, &soft_lockup_nmi_warn)) {
-				/* Someone else will report us. Let's give up */
-				__this_cpu_write(soft_watchdog_warn, true);
+			if (test_and_set_bit(0, &soft_lockup_nmi_warn))
 				return HRTIMER_RESTART;
-			}
 		}
 
 		/* Start period for the next softlockup warning. */
@@ -436,9 +428,7 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart watchdog_timer_fn(struct hrtimer *hrtimer)
 		add_taint(TAINT_SOFTLOCKUP, LOCKDEP_STILL_OK);
 		if (softlockup_panic)
 			panic("softlockup: hung tasks");
-		__this_cpu_write(soft_watchdog_warn, true);
-	} else
-		__this_cpu_write(soft_watchdog_warn, false);
+	}
 
 	return HRTIMER_RESTART;
 }
-- 
2.30.2