netdev - Re: [PATCH 11/30] um: Improve panic notifiers consistency and ordering

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]

Message-ID: <1760d499824f9ef053af7a8dac04b48ab7d7fd3d.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Date:   Fri, 13 May 2022 16:44:36 +0200
From:   Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:     "Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpiccoli@...lia.com>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
Cc:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org, bhe@...hat.com,
        kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-leds@...r.kernel.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-um@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
        sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
        x86@...nel.org, kernel-dev@...lia.com, kernel@...ccoli.net,
        halves@...onical.com, fabiomirmar@...il.com,
        alejandro.j.jimenez@...cle.com, andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com,
        arnd@...db.de, bp@...en8.de, corbet@....net,
        d.hatayama@...fujitsu.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
        dyoung@...hat.com, feng.tang@...el.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        mikelley@...rosoft.com, hidehiro.kawai.ez@...achi.com,
        jgross@...e.com, john.ogness@...utronix.de, keescook@...omium.org,
        luto@...nel.org, mhiramat@...nel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
        paulmck@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
        senozhatsky@...omium.org, stern@...land.harvard.edu,
        tglx@...utronix.de, vgoyal@...hat.com, vkuznets@...hat.com,
        will@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/30] um: Improve panic notifiers consistency and
 ordering

On Wed, 2022-05-11 at 17:22 -0300, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
> On 10/05/2022 11:28, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > [...]
> > It is not clear to me why user mode linux should not care about
> > the other notifiers. It might be because I do not know much
> > about the user mode linux.
> > 
> > Is the because they always create core dump or are never running
> > in a hypervisor or ...?
> > 
> > AFAIK, the notifiers do many different things. For example, there
> > is a notifier that disables RCU watchdog, print some extra
> > information. Why none of them make sense here?
> > 
> 
> Hi Petr, my understanding is that UML is a form of running Linux as a
> regular userspace process for testing purposes.

Correct.

> With that said, as soon
> as we exit in the error path, less "pollution" would happen, so users
> can use GDB to debug the core dump for example.
> 
> In later patches of this series (when we split the panic notifiers in 3
> lists) these UML notifiers run in the pre-reboot list, so they run after
> the informational notifiers for example (in the default level).
> But without the list split we cannot order properly, so my gut feeling
> is that makes sense to run them rather earlier than later in the panic
> process...
> 
> Maybe Anton / Johannes / Richard could give their opinions - appreciate
> that, I'm not attached to the priority here, it's more about users'
> common usage of UML I can think of...

It's hard to say ... In a sense I'm not sure it matters?

OTOH something like the ftrace dump notifier (kernel/trace/trace.c)
might still be useful to run before the mconsole and coredump ones, even
if you could probably use gdb to figure out the information.

Personally, I don't have a scenario where I'd care about the trace
buffers though, and most of the others I found would seem irrelevant
(drivers that aren't even compiled, hung tasks won't really happen since
we exit immediately, and similar.)

johannes