| 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: <b51ace6a-100b-4d79-9a48-c6528f25f6d2@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2024 09:27:39 +0800
From: Liu Song <liusong@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: Bitao Hu <yaoma@...ux.alibaba.com>, dianders@...omium.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, pmladek@...e.com, kernelfans@...il.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 1/3] watchdog/softlockup: low-overhead detection of
interrupt
在 2024/2/4 22:51, Bitao Hu 写道:
> The following softlockup is caused by interrupt storm, but it cannot be
> identified from the call tree. Because the call tree is just a snapshot
> and doesn't fully capture the behavior of the CPU during the soft lockup.
> watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#28 stuck for 23s! [fio:83921]
> ...
> Call trace:
> __do_softirq+0xa0/0x37c
> __irq_exit_rcu+0x108/0x140
> irq_exit+0x14/0x20
> __handle_domain_irq+0x84/0xe0
> gic_handle_irq+0x80/0x108
> el0_irq_naked+0x50/0x58
>
> Therefore，I think it is necessary to report CPU utilization during the
> softlockup_thresh period (report once every sample_period, for a total
> of 5 reportings), like this:
> watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#28 stuck for 23s! [fio:83921]
> CPU#28 Utilization every 4s during lockup:
> #1: 0% system, 0% softirq, 100% hardirq, 0% idle
> #2: 0% system, 0% softirq, 100% hardirq, 0% idle
> #3: 0% system, 0% softirq, 100% hardirq, 0% idle
> #4: 0% system, 0% softirq, 100% hardirq, 0% idle
> #5: 0% system, 0% softirq, 100% hardirq, 0% idle
> ...
>
> This would be helpful in determining whether an interrupt storm has
> occurred or in identifying the cause of the softlockup. The criteria for
> determination are as follows:
> a. If the hardirq utilization is high, then interrupt storm should be
> considered and the root cause cannot be determined from the call tree.
> b. If the softirq utilization is high, then we could analyze the call
> tree but it may cannot reflect the root cause.
> c. If the system utilization is high, then we could analyze the root
> cause from the call tree.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bitao Hu <yaoma@...ux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> kernel/watchdog.c | 91 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 91 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
> index 81a8862295d6..7b121e166b81 100644
> --- a/kernel/watchdog.c
> +++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
> @@ -16,6 +16,8 @@
> #include <linux/cpu.h>
> #include <linux/nmi.h>
> #include <linux/init.h>
> +#include <linux/kernel_stat.h>
> +#include <linux/math64.h>
> #include <linux/module.h>
> #include <linux/sysctl.h>
> #include <linux/tick.h>
> @@ -333,6 +335,92 @@ __setup("watchdog_thresh=", watchdog_thresh_setup);
>
> static void __lockup_detector_cleanup(void);
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING
> +#define NUM_STATS_GROUPS 5
> +enum stats_per_group {
> + STATS_SYSTEM,
> + STATS_SOFTIRQ,
> + STATS_HARDIRQ,
> + STATS_IDLE,
> + NUM_STATS_PER_GROUP,
> +};
> +static const enum cpu_usage_stat tracked_stats[NUM_STATS_PER_GROUP] = {
> + CPUTIME_SYSTEM,
> + CPUTIME_SOFTIRQ,
> + CPUTIME_IRQ,
> + CPUTIME_IDLE,
> +};
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(u16, cpustat_old[NUM_STATS_PER_GROUP]);
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(u8, cpustat_util[NUM_STATS_GROUPS][NUM_STATS_PER_GROUP]);
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(u8, cpustat_tail);
> +
> +/*
> + * We don't need nanosecond resolution. A granularity of 16ms is
> + * sufficient for our precision, allowing us to use u16 to store
> + * cpustats, which will roll over roughly every ~1000 seconds.
> + * 2^24 ~= 16 * 10^6
> + */
> +static u16 get_16bit_precision(u64 data_ns)
> +{
> + return data_ns >> 24LL; /* 2^24ns ~= 16.8ms */
> +}
> +
> +static void update_cpustat(void)
> +{
> + int i;
> + u8 util;
> + u16 old_stat;
> + u16 new_stat;
> + u8 tail = __this_cpu_read(cpustat_tail);
> + struct kernel_cpustat kcpustat;
> + u64 *cpustat = kcpustat.cpustat;
> + u16 sample_period_16 = get_16bit_precision(sample_period);
> +
> + kcpustat_cpu_fetch(&kcpustat, smp_processor_id());
> + for (i = 0; i < NUM_STATS_PER_GROUP; i++) {
> + old_stat = __this_cpu_read(cpustat_old[i]);
> + new_stat = get_16bit_precision(cpustat[tracked_stats[i]]);
> + util = DIV_ROUND_UP(100 * (new_stat - old_stat), sample_period_16);
> + __this_cpu_write(cpustat_util[tail][i], util);
> + __this_cpu_write(cpustat_old[i], new_stat);
> + }
> + __this_cpu_write(cpustat_tail, (tail + 1) % NUM_STATS_GROUPS);
> +}
> +
> +static void print_cpustat(void)
> +{
> + int i;
> + int group;
> + u8 tail = __this_cpu_read(cpustat_tail);
> + u64 sample_period_second = sample_period;
> +
> + do_div(sample_period_second, NSEC_PER_SEC);
> + /*
> + * We do not want the "watchdog: " prefix on every line,
> + * hence we use "printk" instead of "pr_crit".
> + */
> + printk(KERN_CRIT "CPU#%d Utilization every %llus during lockup:\n",
> + smp_processor_id(), sample_period_second);
> + for (i = 0; i < NUM_STATS_GROUPS; i++) {
> + group = (tail + i) % NUM_STATS_GROUPS;
> + printk(KERN_CRIT "\t#%d: %3u%% system,\t%3u%% softirq,\t"
> + "%3u%% hardirq,\t%3u%% idle\n", i+1,
> + __this_cpu_read(cpustat_util[group][STATS_SYSTEM]),
> + __this_cpu_read(cpustat_util[group][STATS_SOFTIRQ]),
> + __this_cpu_read(cpustat_util[group][STATS_HARDIRQ]),
> + __this_cpu_read(cpustat_util[group][STATS_IDLE]));
> + }
> +}
> +
> +static void report_cpu_status(void)
> +{
> + print_cpustat();
> +}
> +#else
> +static inline void update_cpustat(void) { }
> +static inline void report_cpu_status(void) { }
> +#endif
> +
> /*
> * Hard-lockup warnings should be triggered after just a few seconds. Soft-
> * lockups can have false positives under extreme conditions. So we generally
> @@ -504,6 +592,8 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart watchdog_timer_fn(struct hrtimer *hrtimer)
> */
> period_ts = READ_ONCE(*this_cpu_ptr(&watchdog_report_ts));
>
> + update_cpustat();
> +
> /* Reset the interval when touched by known problematic code. */
> if (period_ts == SOFTLOCKUP_DELAY_REPORT) {
> if (unlikely(__this_cpu_read(softlockup_touch_sync))) {
> @@ -539,6 +629,7 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart watchdog_timer_fn(struct hrtimer *hrtimer)
> pr_emerg("BUG: soft lockup - CPU#%d stuck for %us! [%s:%d]\n",
> smp_processor_id(), duration,
> current->comm, task_pid_nr(current));
> + report_cpu_status();
> print_modules();
> print_irqtrace_events(current);
> if (regs)
Looks good, and advisable to combine declarations of variables of the
same type into one line to save on the number of lines.
Reviewed-by: Liu Song <liusong@...ux.alibaba.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists