[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <13250a8d-1a59-4b7b-92e4-1231d73cbdda@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2021 10:37:31 +0000
From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
To: Olivier Langlois <olivier@...llion01.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] coredump: Do not interrupt dump for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
On 12/24/21 01:34, Olivier Langlois wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-10-22 at 15:13 +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>> On 6/9/21 21:17, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> In short, a task creates an io_uring worker thread, then the worker
>> submits a task_work item to the creator task and won't die until
>> the item is executed/cancelled. And I found that the creator task is
>> sleeping in do_coredump() -> wait_for_completion()
>>
[...]
>> A hack executing tws there helps (see diff below).
>> Any chance anyone knows what this is and how to fix it?
>>
[...]
> Pavel,
>
> I cannot comment on the merit of the proposed hack but my proposed
> patch to fix the coredump truncation issue when a process using
> io_uring core dumps that I submitted back in August is still
> unreviewed!
That's unfortunate. Not like I can help in any case, but I assumed
it was dealt with by
commit 06af8679449d4ed282df13191fc52d5ba28ec536
Author: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Date: Thu Jun 10 15:11:11 2021 -0500
coredump: Limit what can interrupt coredumps
Olivier Langlois has been struggling with coredumps being incompletely written in
processes using io_uring.
...
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1625bc89782bf83d9d8c7c63e8ffcb651ccb15fa.1629655338.git.olivier@trillion01.com/
>
> I have been using it since then I must have generated many dozens of
> perfect core dump files with it and I have not seen a single truncated
> core dump files like I used to have prior to the patch.
>
> I am bringing back my patch to your attention because one nice side
> effect of it is that it would have avoided totally the problem that you
> have encountered in coredump_wait() since it does cancel io_uring
> resources before calling coredump_wait()!
FWIW, I worked it around in io_uring back then by breaking the
dependency.
--
Pavel Begunkov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists