linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/7] arch: __get_wchan || STACKTRACE

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: <YWBLl0mMTGPE/7hM@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Fri, 8 Oct 2021 15:45:59 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc:     keescook@...omium.org, jannh@...gle.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, vcaputo@...garu.com,
        mingo@...hat.com, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de,
        bristot@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        christian.brauner@...ntu.com, amistry@...gle.com,
        Kenta.Tada@...y.com, legion@...nel.org,
        michael.weiss@...ec.fraunhofer.de, mhocko@...e.com, deller@....de,
        zhengqi.arch@...edance.com, me@...in.cc, tycho@...ho.pizza,
        tglx@...utronix.de, bp@...en8.de, hpa@...or.com, axboe@...nel.dk,
        metze@...ba.org, laijs@...ux.alibaba.com, luto@...nel.org,
        dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
        ohoono.kwon@...sung.com, kaleshsingh@...gle.com,
        yifeifz2@...inois.edu, jpoimboe@...hat.com,
        linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        vgupta@...nel.org, linux@...linux.org.uk, will@...nel.org,
        guoren@...nel.org, bcain@...eaurora.org, monstr@...str.eu,
        tsbogend@...ha.franken.de, nickhu@...estech.com,
        jonas@...thpole.se, mpe@...erman.id.au, paul.walmsley@...ive.com,
        hca@...ux.ibm.com, ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp, davem@...emloft.net,
        chris@...kel.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] arch: __get_wchan || STACKTRACE_SUPPORT

On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 01:40:52PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> [Adding Josh, since there might be a concern here from a livepatch pov]
> 

> > +static unsigned long __get_wchan(struct task_struct *p)
> > +{
> > +	unsigned long entry = 0;
> > +
> > +	stack_trace_save_tsk(p, &entry, 1, 0);
> 
> This assumes stack_trace_save_tsk() will skip sched functions, but I
> don't think that's ever been a requirement? It's certinaly not
> documented anywhere that I could find, and arm64 doesn't do so today,
> and this patch causes wchan to just log `__switch_to` for everything.

Confused, arm64 has arch_stack_walk() and should thus use
kernel/stacktrace.c's stack_trace_consume_entry_nosched.

> I realise you "fix" that for some arches in the next patch, but it's not
> clear to me that's the right thing to do -- I would expect that

I only actually change the behaviour on csky, both mips and nds32 have
this 'savesched = (task == current)' logic which ends up being a very
confusing way to write things, but for wchan we never call on current,
and hence don't save the __sched functions.

> stack_trace_save_tsk() *shouldn't* skip anything unless we've explicitly
> told it to via skipnr, because I'd expect that

It's what most archs happen to do today and is what
stack_trace_save_tsk() as implemented using arch_stack_walk() does.
Which is I think the closest to canonical we have.

> stack_trace_save_tsk_reliable() mustn't, in case we ever need to patch
> anything in the scheduler (or arch ctxsw code) with a livepatch, or if
> you ever *want* to have the sched functions in a trace.
> 
> So I have two big questions:
> 
> 1) Where precisely should stack_trace_save_tsk() and
>    stack_trace_save_tsk_reliable() start from?
> 
> 1) What should you do when you *do* want sched functions in a trace?
> 
> We could side-step the issue here by using arch_stack_walk(), which'd
> make it easy to skip sched functions in the core code.

arch_stack_walk() is the modern API and should be used going forward,
and I've gone with the stack_trace_save*() implementation as per that.