[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3897a38ef97742f7f51fb4c84c5ddeb4e36dae79.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2023 03:05:25 +0100
From: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>
Cc: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@...il.com>,
kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/33] ftrace: Unpoison ftrace_regs in
ftrace_ops_list_func()
On Fri, 2023-12-08 at 09:31 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 15:16:10 +0100
> Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 11:02 PM Ilya Leoshkevich
> > <iii@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Architectures use assembly code to initialize ftrace_regs and
> > > call
> > > ftrace_ops_list_func(). Therefore, from the KMSAN's point of
> > > view,
> > > ftrace_regs is poisoned on ftrace_ops_list_func entry(). This
> > > causes
> > > KMSAN warnings when running the ftrace testsuite.
> >
> > I couldn't reproduce these warnings on x86, hope you really need
> > this
> > change on s390 :)
I just double-checked, and it's still needed. Without it, I get:
[ 4.140184] =====================================================
[ 4.140416] BUG: KMSAN: uninit-value in
arch_ftrace_ops_list_func+0x8e6/0x14b0
[ 4.140484] arch_ftrace_ops_list_func+0x8e6/0x14b0
[ 4.140546] ftrace_graph_caller+0x0/0x34
[ 4.140614] read_tod_clock+0x6/0x1e0
[ 4.140671] ktime_get+0x3a4/0x670
[ 4.140727] clockevents_program_event+0x1c8/0xb10
[ 4.140785] tick_program_event+0x11e/0x230
[ 4.140842] hrtimer_interrupt+0x118a/0x1d10
[ 4.140898] do_IRQ+0x108/0x150
[ 4.140959] do_irq_async+0xfc/0x270
[ 4.141021] do_ext_irq+0x98/0x120
[ 4.141080] ext_int_handler+0xc4/0xf0
[ 4.141141] _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0xfa/0x190
[ 4.141207] _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0xf6/0x190
[ 4.141271] s390_kernel_write+0x218/0x250
[ 4.141328] ftrace_make_call+0x362/0x4a0
[ 4.141386] __ftrace_replace_code+0xb44/0xbd0
[ 4.141442] ftrace_replace_code+0x1d8/0x440
[ 4.141497] ftrace_modify_all_code+0xfe/0x510
[ 4.141555] ftrace_startup+0x4f0/0xcf0
[ 4.141609] register_ftrace_function+0x1316/0x1440
[ 4.141670] function_trace_init+0x2c0/0x3d0
[ 4.141732] tracer_init+0x282/0x370
[ 4.141789] trace_selftest_startup_function+0x104/0x19d0
[ 4.141857] run_tracer_selftest+0x7c8/0xab0
[ 4.141918] init_trace_selftests+0x200/0x820
[ 4.141977] do_one_initcall+0x35e/0x1090
[ 4.142032] do_initcall_level+0x276/0x660
[ 4.142095] do_initcalls+0x16a/0x2d0
[ 4.142153] kernel_init_freeable+0x632/0x960
[ 4.142216] kernel_init+0x36/0x1810
[ 4.142277] __ret_from_fork+0xc0/0x180
[ 4.142333] ret_from_fork+0xa/0x30
[ 4.142431] Local variable agg.tmp.i.i created at:
02:06:55 [30/1836]
[ 4.142476] timekeeping_advance+0x79a/0x2870
[ 4.142394]
[ 4.142431] Local variable agg.tmp.i.i created at:
[ 4.142476] timekeeping_advance+0x79a/0x2870
[ 4.142534]
[ 4.142573] CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Tainted: G W
6.7.0-rc4-g7657d31dc545 #4
[ 4.142638] Hardware name: IBM 3931 A01 704 (KVM/Linux)
[ 4.142686] =====================================================
[ 4.142734] Kernel panic - not syncing: kmsan.panic set ...
[ 4.142734] =====================================================
> On x86, ftrace_regs sits on the stack. And IIUC, s390 doesn't have
> the same
> concept of a "stack" as other architectures. Perhaps that's the
> reason s390
> needs this?
It's not that different on s390x. There is indeed no architecture-
mandated stack pointer and no push/pop, but other than that it's fairly
normal. Linux uses %r15 as a stack pointer.
On s390x ftrace_regs is allocated on stack by mcount.S. From what I can
see, Intel's ftrace_64.S does the same thing, so I don't immediately
see why uninit-value is not detected on Intel, even though I think it
should.
> -- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists