linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/nmi: Fix "in NMI handler" check

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, 7 Feb 2024 10:44:57 -0800
From: Xin Li <xin@...or.com>
To: paulmck@...nel.org, Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, leit@...a.com,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "open list:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)"
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/nmi: Fix "in NMI handler" check

On 2/7/2024 10:30 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2024 at 08:52:35AM -0800, Breno Leitao wrote:
>> Commit 344da544f177 ("x86/nmi: Print reasons why backtrace NMIs are
>> ignored") creates a super nice framework to diagnose NMIs.
>>
>> Every time nmi_exc() is called, it increments a per_cpu counter
>> (nsp->idt_nmi_seq). At its exit, it also increments the same counter.
>> Looking at this counter, you can see how many times that function was
>> called (dividing by 2), and, if the function is still being executed, by
>> checking the idt_nmi_seq's last bit.
>>
>> On the check side (nmi_backtrace_stall_check()), that variable is
>> queried to check if the NMI is still being executed, but, there is a
>> mistake in the bitwise operation. That code wants to check if the last
>> bit of the idt_nmi_seq is set or not, but, does the opposite, and check
>> for all the other bits, which will always be true after the first
>> exc_nmi() executed successfully.
>>
>> This appends the misleading string to the dump "(CPU currently in NMI
>> handler function)"
>>
>> Fix it by checking the last bit, and if it is set, append the string.
>>
>> Fixes: 344da544f177 ("x86/nmi: Print reasons why backtrace NMIs are ignored")
>> Signed-off-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
> 
> If someone else is taking this:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> 
> (I am queueing it for testing in any case.)

Does this fix need to be backported?

Commit 344da544f177 has a date on Dec 16 2022.

> 
>> ---
>>   arch/x86/kernel/nmi.c | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/nmi.c b/arch/x86/kernel/nmi.c
>> index 17e955ab69fe..6e738ad474dc 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/nmi.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/nmi.c
>> @@ -639,7 +639,7 @@ void nmi_backtrace_stall_check(const struct cpumask *btp)
>>   			msgp = nmi_check_stall_msg[idx];
>>   			if (nsp->idt_ignored_snap != READ_ONCE(nsp->idt_ignored) && (idx & 0x1))
>>   				modp = ", but OK because ignore_nmis was set";
>> -			if (nmi_seq & ~0x1)
>> +			if (nmi_seq & 0x1)
>>   				msghp = " (CPU currently in NMI handler function)";
>>   			else if (nsp->idt_nmi_seq_snap + 1 == nmi_seq)
>>   				msghp = " (CPU exited one NMI handler function)";
>> -- 
>> 2.39.3
>>
> 

-- 
Thanks!
     Xin