linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 22/30] Code tagging based fault injection

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:   Wed, 31 Aug 2022 13:30:10 -0400
From:   Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
To:     Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Cc:     Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        mhocko@...e.com, vbabka@...e.cz, hannes@...xchg.org,
        roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, mgorman@...e.de, dave@...olabs.net,
        willy@...radead.org, liam.howlett@...cle.com, void@...ifault.com,
        peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com, ldufour@...ux.ibm.com,
        peterx@...hat.com, david@...hat.com, axboe@...nel.dk,
        mcgrof@...nel.org, masahiroy@...nel.org, nathan@...nel.org,
        changbin.du@...el.com, ytcoode@...il.com,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, bristot@...hat.com,
        vschneid@...hat.com, cl@...ux.com, penberg@...nel.org,
        iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, 42.hyeyoo@...il.com, glider@...gle.com,
        elver@...gle.com, shakeelb@...gle.com, songmuchun@...edance.com,
        arnd@...db.de, jbaron@...mai.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
        minchan@...gle.com, kaleshsingh@...gle.com,
        kernel-team@...roid.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
        kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
        linux-bcache@...r.kernel.org, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 22/30] Code tagging based fault injection

On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 12:37:14PM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Aug 2022 at 23:50, Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
> >
> > This adds a new fault injection capability, based on code tagging.
> >
> > To use, simply insert somewhere in your code
> >
> >   dynamic_fault("fault_class_name")
> >
> > and check whether it returns true - if so, inject the error.
> > For example
> >
> >   if (dynamic_fault("init"))
> >       return -EINVAL;
> 
> Hi Suren,
> 
> If this is going to be used by mainline kernel, it would be good to
> integrate this with fail_nth systematic fault injection:
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/lib/fault-inject.c#L109
> 
> Otherwise these dynamic sites won't be tested by testing systems doing
> systematic fault injection testing.

That's a discussion we need to have, yeah. We don't want two distinct fault
injection frameworks, we'll have to have a discussion as to whether this is (or
can be) better enough to make a switch worthwhile, and whether a compatibility
interface is needed - or maybe there's enough distinct interesting bits in both
to make merging plausible?

The debugfs interface for this fault injection code is necessarily different
from our existing fault injection - this gives you a fault injection point _per
callsite_, which is huge - e.g. for filesystem testing what I need is to be able
to enable fault injection points within a given module. I can do that easily
with this, not with our current fault injection.

I think the per-callsite fault injection points would also be pretty valuable
for CONFIG_FAULT_INJECTION_USERCOPY, too.

OTOH, existing kernel fault injection can filter based on task - this fault
injection framework doesn't have that. Easy enough to add, though. Similar for
the interval/probability/ratelimit stuff.

fail_function is the odd one out, I'm not sure how that would fit into this
model. Everything else I've seen I think fits into this model.

Also, it sounds like you're more familiar with our existing fault injection than
I am, so if I've misunderstood anything about what it can do please do correct
me.

Interestingly: I just discovered from reading the code that
CONFIG_FAULT_INJECTION_STACKTRACE_FILTER is a thing (hadn't before because it
depends on !X86_64 - what?). That's cool, though.