| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <Y19kStu4zBFyvKPK@feng-clx>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2022 13:59:38 +0800
From: Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <clm@...a.com>,
<jstultz@...gle.com>, <tglx@...utronix.de>, <sboyd@...nel.org>,
<longman@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH clocksource] Reject bogus watchdog clocksource
measurements
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 10:52:45AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
[...]
> > > Left to myself, I would use a capped power-of-two backoff that was reset
> > > any time that the interval was within bounds. Maybe a cap of 10 minutes?
> >
> > Yep, that's more informative. Thanks!
>
> And here is the resulting patch. Thoughts?
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> commit adc0512cf34fe7f0d73966d59644b826ee526742
> Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> Date: Fri Oct 28 10:38:58 2022 -0700
>
> clocksource: Exponential backoff for load-induced bogus watchdog reads
>
> The clocksource watchdog will reject measurements that are excessively
> delayed, that is, by more than 1.5 seconds beyond the intended 0.5-second
> watchdog interval. On an extremely busy system, this can result in a
> console message being printed every two seconds. This is excessively
> noisy for a non-error condition.
>
> Therefore, apply exponential backoff to these messages. This exponential
> backoff is capped at 1024 times the watchdog interval, which comes to
> not quite one message per ten minutes.
>
> Please note that the bogus watchdog reads that occur when the watchdog
> interval is less than 0.125 seconds are still printed unconditionally
> because these likely correspond to a serious error condition in the
> timer code or hardware.
>
> Reported-by: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
> Reported-by: Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> Cc: John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Cc: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
> Cc: Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>
> Cc: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/clocksource.h b/include/linux/clocksource.h
> index 1d42d4b173271..daac05aedf56a 100644
> --- a/include/linux/clocksource.h
> +++ b/include/linux/clocksource.h
> @@ -125,6 +125,10 @@ struct clocksource {
> struct list_head wd_list;
> u64 cs_last;
> u64 wd_last;
> + u64 wd_last_bogus;
> + int wd_bogus_shift;
> + unsigned long wd_bogus_count;
> + unsigned long wd_bogus_count_last;
> #endif
> struct module *owner;
> };
> diff --git a/kernel/time/clocksource.c b/kernel/time/clocksource.c
> index 3f5317faf891f..6537ffa02e445 100644
> --- a/kernel/time/clocksource.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/clocksource.c
> @@ -448,8 +448,26 @@ static void clocksource_watchdog(struct timer_list *unused)
> continue;
> }
> if (wd_nsec > (wdi << 2)) {
Just recalled one thing, that it may be better to check 'cs_nsec'
instead of 'wd_nsec', as some watchdog may have small wrap-around
value. IIRC, HPET's counter is 32 bits long and wraps at about
300 seconds, and PMTIMER's counter is 24 bits which wraps at about
3 ~ 4 seconds. So when a long stall of the watchdog timer happens,
the watchdog's value could 'overflow' many times.
And usually the 'current' closcksource has longer wrap time than
the watchdog.
> - /* This can happen on busy systems, which can delay the watchdog. */
> - pr_warn("timekeeping watchdog on CPU%d: Watchdog clocksource '%s' advanced an excessive %lld ns during %d-jiffy time interval, probable CPU overutilization, skipping watchdog check.\n", smp_processor_id(), watchdog->name, wd_nsec, WATCHDOG_INTERVAL);
> + bool needwarn = false;
> + u64 wd_lb;
> +
> + cs->wd_bogus_count++;
> + if (!cs->wd_bogus_shift) {
> + needwarn = true;
> + } else {
> + delta = clocksource_delta(wdnow, cs->wd_last_bogus, watchdog->mask);
> + wd_lb = clocksource_cyc2ns(delta, watchdog->mult, watchdog->shift);
> + if ((1 << cs->wd_bogus_shift) * wdi <= wd_lb)
> + needwarn = true;
I'm not sure if we need to check the last_bogus counter, or just
the current interval 'cs_nsec' is what we care, and some code
like this ?
diff --git a/include/linux/clocksource.h b/include/linux/clocksource.h
index daac05aedf56..3910dbb9b960 100644
--- a/include/linux/clocksource.h
+++ b/include/linux/clocksource.h
@@ -125,7 +125,6 @@ struct clocksource {
struct list_head wd_list;
u64 cs_last;
u64 wd_last;
- u64 wd_last_bogus;
int wd_bogus_shift;
unsigned long wd_bogus_count;
unsigned long wd_bogus_count_last;
diff --git a/kernel/time/clocksource.c b/kernel/time/clocksource.c
index 6537ffa02e44..8e6d498b1492 100644
--- a/kernel/time/clocksource.c
+++ b/kernel/time/clocksource.c
@@ -442,28 +442,18 @@ static void clocksource_watchdog(struct timer_list *unused)
/* Check for bogus measurements. */
wdi = jiffies_to_nsecs(WATCHDOG_INTERVAL);
- if (wd_nsec < (wdi >> 2)) {
+ if (cs_nsec < (wdi >> 2)) {
/* This usually indicates broken timer code or hardware. */
- pr_warn("timekeeping watchdog on CPU%d: Watchdog clocksource '%s' advanced only %lld ns during %d-jiffy time interval, skipping watchdog check.\n", smp_processor_id(), watchdog->name, wd_nsec, WATCHDOG_INTERVAL);
+ pr_warn("timekeeping watchdog on CPU%d: clocksource '%s' advanced only %lld ns during %d-jiffy time interval, skipping watchdog check.\n", smp_processor_id(), cs->name, wd_nsec, WATCHDOG_INTERVAL);
continue;
}
- if (wd_nsec > (wdi << 2)) {
- bool needwarn = false;
- u64 wd_lb;
-
+ if (cs_nsec > (wdi << 2)) {
cs->wd_bogus_count++;
- if (!cs->wd_bogus_shift) {
- needwarn = true;
- } else {
- delta = clocksource_delta(wdnow, cs->wd_last_bogus, watchdog->mask);
- wd_lb = clocksource_cyc2ns(delta, watchdog->mult, watchdog->shift);
- if ((1 << cs->wd_bogus_shift) * wdi <= wd_lb)
- needwarn = true;
- }
- if (needwarn) {
+ if (!cs->wd_bogus_shift ||
+ (1 << cs->wd_bogus_shift) * wdi <= cs_nsec) {
/* This can happen on busy systems, which can delay the watchdog. */
- pr_warn("timekeeping watchdog on CPU%d: Watchdog clocksource '%s' advanced an excessive %lld ns during %d-jiffy time interval (%lu additional), probable CPU overutilization, skipping watchdog check.\n", smp_processor_id(), watchdog->name, wd_nsec, WATCHDOG_INTERVAL, cs->wd_bogus_count - cs->wd_bogus_count_last);
- cs->wd_last_bogus = wdnow;
+ pr_warn("timekeeping watchdog on CPU%d: clocksource '%s' advanced an excessive %lld ns during %d-jiffy time interval (%lu additional), probable CPU overutilization, skipping watchdog check.\n", smp_processor_id(), cs->name, cs_nsec, WATCHDOG_INTERVAL, cs->wd_bogus_count - cs->wd_bogus_count_last);
+
if (cs->wd_bogus_shift < 10)
cs->wd_bogus_shift++;
cs->wd_bogus_count_last = cs->wd_bogus_count;
Thanks,
Feng
> + }
> + if (needwarn) {
> + /* This can happen on busy systems, which can delay the watchdog. */
> + pr_warn("timekeeping watchdog on CPU%d: Watchdog clocksource '%s' advanced an excessive %lld ns during %d-jiffy time interval (%lu additional), probable CPU overutilization, skipping watchdog check.\n", smp_processor_id(), watchdog->name, wd_nsec, WATCHDOG_INTERVAL, cs->wd_bogus_count - cs->wd_bogus_count_last);
> + cs->wd_last_bogus = wdnow;
> + if (cs->wd_bogus_shift < 10)
> + cs->wd_bogus_shift++;
> + cs->wd_bogus_count_last = cs->wd_bogus_count;
> + }
> continue;
> }
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists