| /openbmc/linux/include/linux/ |
| H A D | kdb.h | 34aaff40 Wed Dec 14 17:05:58 CST 2016 Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> kdb: call vkdb_printf() from vprintk_default() only when wanted
kdb_trap_printk allows to pass normal printk() messages to kdb via
vkdb_printk(). For example, it is used to get backtrace using the
classic show_stack(), see kdb_show_stack().
vkdb_printf() tries to avoid a potential infinite loop by disabling the
trap. But this approach is racy, for example:
CPU1 CPU2
vkdb_printf()
// assume that kdb_trap_printk == 0
saved_trap_printk = kdb_trap_printk;
kdb_trap_printk = 0;
kdb_show_stack()
kdb_trap_printk++;
Problem1: Now, a nested printk() on CPU0 calls vkdb_printf()
even when it should have been disabled. It will not
cause a deadlock but...
// using the outdated saved value: 0
kdb_trap_printk = saved_trap_printk;
kdb_trap_printk--;
Problem2: Now, kdb_trap_printk == -1 and will stay like this.
It means that all messages will get passed to kdb from
now on.
This patch removes the racy saved_trap_printk handling. Instead, the
recursion is prevented by a check for the locked CPU.
The solution is still kind of racy. A non-related printk(), from
another process, might get trapped by vkdb_printf(). And the wanted
printk() might not get trapped because kdb_printf_cpu is assigned. But
this problem existed even with the original code.
A proper solution would be to get_cpu() before setting kdb_trap_printk
and trap messages only from this CPU. I am not sure if it is worth the
effort, though.
In fact, the race is very theoretical. When kdb is running any of the
commands that use kdb_trap_printk there is a single active CPU and the
other CPUs should be in a holding pen inside kgdb_cpu_enter().
The only time this is violated is when there is a timeout waiting for
the other CPUs to report to the holding pen.
Finally, note that the situation is a bit schizophrenic. vkdb_printf()
explicitly allows recursion but only from KDB code that calls
kdb_printf() directly. On the other hand, the generic printk()
recursion is not allowed because it might cause an infinite loop. This
is why we could not hide the decision inside vkdb_printf() easily.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1480412276-16690-4-git-send-email-pmladek@suse.com
Signed-off-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
Cc: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
34aaff40 Wed Dec 14 17:05:58 CST 2016 Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> kdb: call vkdb_printf() from vprintk_default() only when wanted
kdb_trap_printk allows to pass normal printk() messages to kdb via
vkdb_printk(). For example, it is used to get backtrace using the
classic show_stack(), see kdb_show_stack().
vkdb_printf() tries to avoid a potential infinite loop by disabling the
trap. But this approach is racy, for example:
CPU1 CPU2
vkdb_printf()
// assume that kdb_trap_printk == 0
saved_trap_printk = kdb_trap_printk;
kdb_trap_printk = 0;
kdb_show_stack()
kdb_trap_printk++;
Problem1: Now, a nested printk() on CPU0 calls vkdb_printf()
even when it should have been disabled. It will not
cause a deadlock but...
// using the outdated saved value: 0
kdb_trap_printk = saved_trap_printk;
kdb_trap_printk--;
Problem2: Now, kdb_trap_printk == -1 and will stay like this.
It means that all messages will get passed to kdb from
now on.
This patch removes the racy saved_trap_printk handling. Instead, the
recursion is prevented by a check for the locked CPU.
The solution is still kind of racy. A non-related printk(), from
another process, might get trapped by vkdb_printf(). And the wanted
printk() might not get trapped because kdb_printf_cpu is assigned. But
this problem existed even with the original code.
A proper solution would be to get_cpu() before setting kdb_trap_printk
and trap messages only from this CPU. I am not sure if it is worth the
effort, though.
In fact, the race is very theoretical. When kdb is running any of the
commands that use kdb_trap_printk there is a single active CPU and the
other CPUs should be in a holding pen inside kgdb_cpu_enter().
The only time this is violated is when there is a timeout waiting for
the other CPUs to report to the holding pen.
Finally, note that the situation is a bit schizophrenic. vkdb_printf()
explicitly allows recursion but only from KDB code that calls
kdb_printf() directly. On the other hand, the generic printk()
recursion is not allowed because it might cause an infinite loop. This
is why we could not hide the decision inside vkdb_printf() easily.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1480412276-16690-4-git-send-email-pmladek@suse.com
Signed-off-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
Cc: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|
| /openbmc/linux/kernel/debug/kdb/ |
| H A D | kdb_io.c | 34aaff40 Wed Dec 14 17:05:58 CST 2016 Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> kdb: call vkdb_printf() from vprintk_default() only when wanted
kdb_trap_printk allows to pass normal printk() messages to kdb via
vkdb_printk(). For example, it is used to get backtrace using the
classic show_stack(), see kdb_show_stack().
vkdb_printf() tries to avoid a potential infinite loop by disabling the
trap. But this approach is racy, for example:
CPU1 CPU2
vkdb_printf()
// assume that kdb_trap_printk == 0
saved_trap_printk = kdb_trap_printk;
kdb_trap_printk = 0;
kdb_show_stack()
kdb_trap_printk++;
Problem1: Now, a nested printk() on CPU0 calls vkdb_printf()
even when it should have been disabled. It will not
cause a deadlock but...
// using the outdated saved value: 0
kdb_trap_printk = saved_trap_printk;
kdb_trap_printk--;
Problem2: Now, kdb_trap_printk == -1 and will stay like this.
It means that all messages will get passed to kdb from
now on.
This patch removes the racy saved_trap_printk handling. Instead, the
recursion is prevented by a check for the locked CPU.
The solution is still kind of racy. A non-related printk(), from
another process, might get trapped by vkdb_printf(). And the wanted
printk() might not get trapped because kdb_printf_cpu is assigned. But
this problem existed even with the original code.
A proper solution would be to get_cpu() before setting kdb_trap_printk
and trap messages only from this CPU. I am not sure if it is worth the
effort, though.
In fact, the race is very theoretical. When kdb is running any of the
commands that use kdb_trap_printk there is a single active CPU and the
other CPUs should be in a holding pen inside kgdb_cpu_enter().
The only time this is violated is when there is a timeout waiting for
the other CPUs to report to the holding pen.
Finally, note that the situation is a bit schizophrenic. vkdb_printf()
explicitly allows recursion but only from KDB code that calls
kdb_printf() directly. On the other hand, the generic printk()
recursion is not allowed because it might cause an infinite loop. This
is why we could not hide the decision inside vkdb_printf() easily.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1480412276-16690-4-git-send-email-pmladek@suse.com
Signed-off-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
Cc: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
34aaff40 Wed Dec 14 17:05:58 CST 2016 Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> kdb: call vkdb_printf() from vprintk_default() only when wanted
kdb_trap_printk allows to pass normal printk() messages to kdb via
vkdb_printk(). For example, it is used to get backtrace using the
classic show_stack(), see kdb_show_stack().
vkdb_printf() tries to avoid a potential infinite loop by disabling the
trap. But this approach is racy, for example:
CPU1 CPU2
vkdb_printf()
// assume that kdb_trap_printk == 0
saved_trap_printk = kdb_trap_printk;
kdb_trap_printk = 0;
kdb_show_stack()
kdb_trap_printk++;
Problem1: Now, a nested printk() on CPU0 calls vkdb_printf()
even when it should have been disabled. It will not
cause a deadlock but...
// using the outdated saved value: 0
kdb_trap_printk = saved_trap_printk;
kdb_trap_printk--;
Problem2: Now, kdb_trap_printk == -1 and will stay like this.
It means that all messages will get passed to kdb from
now on.
This patch removes the racy saved_trap_printk handling. Instead, the
recursion is prevented by a check for the locked CPU.
The solution is still kind of racy. A non-related printk(), from
another process, might get trapped by vkdb_printf(). And the wanted
printk() might not get trapped because kdb_printf_cpu is assigned. But
this problem existed even with the original code.
A proper solution would be to get_cpu() before setting kdb_trap_printk
and trap messages only from this CPU. I am not sure if it is worth the
effort, though.
In fact, the race is very theoretical. When kdb is running any of the
commands that use kdb_trap_printk there is a single active CPU and the
other CPUs should be in a holding pen inside kgdb_cpu_enter().
The only time this is violated is when there is a timeout waiting for
the other CPUs to report to the holding pen.
Finally, note that the situation is a bit schizophrenic. vkdb_printf()
explicitly allows recursion but only from KDB code that calls
kdb_printf() directly. On the other hand, the generic printk()
recursion is not allowed because it might cause an infinite loop. This
is why we could not hide the decision inside vkdb_printf() easily.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1480412276-16690-4-git-send-email-pmladek@suse.com
Signed-off-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
Cc: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|
| /openbmc/linux/kernel/printk/ |
| H A D | printk.c | 34aaff40 Wed Dec 14 17:05:58 CST 2016 Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> kdb: call vkdb_printf() from vprintk_default() only when wanted
kdb_trap_printk allows to pass normal printk() messages to kdb via
vkdb_printk(). For example, it is used to get backtrace using the
classic show_stack(), see kdb_show_stack().
vkdb_printf() tries to avoid a potential infinite loop by disabling the
trap. But this approach is racy, for example:
CPU1 CPU2
vkdb_printf()
// assume that kdb_trap_printk == 0
saved_trap_printk = kdb_trap_printk;
kdb_trap_printk = 0;
kdb_show_stack()
kdb_trap_printk++;
Problem1: Now, a nested printk() on CPU0 calls vkdb_printf()
even when it should have been disabled. It will not
cause a deadlock but...
// using the outdated saved value: 0
kdb_trap_printk = saved_trap_printk;
kdb_trap_printk--;
Problem2: Now, kdb_trap_printk == -1 and will stay like this.
It means that all messages will get passed to kdb from
now on.
This patch removes the racy saved_trap_printk handling. Instead, the
recursion is prevented by a check for the locked CPU.
The solution is still kind of racy. A non-related printk(), from
another process, might get trapped by vkdb_printf(). And the wanted
printk() might not get trapped because kdb_printf_cpu is assigned. But
this problem existed even with the original code.
A proper solution would be to get_cpu() before setting kdb_trap_printk
and trap messages only from this CPU. I am not sure if it is worth the
effort, though.
In fact, the race is very theoretical. When kdb is running any of the
commands that use kdb_trap_printk there is a single active CPU and the
other CPUs should be in a holding pen inside kgdb_cpu_enter().
The only time this is violated is when there is a timeout waiting for
the other CPUs to report to the holding pen.
Finally, note that the situation is a bit schizophrenic. vkdb_printf()
explicitly allows recursion but only from KDB code that calls
kdb_printf() directly. On the other hand, the generic printk()
recursion is not allowed because it might cause an infinite loop. This
is why we could not hide the decision inside vkdb_printf() easily.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1480412276-16690-4-git-send-email-pmladek@suse.com
Signed-off-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
Cc: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
34aaff40 Wed Dec 14 17:05:58 CST 2016 Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> kdb: call vkdb_printf() from vprintk_default() only when wanted
kdb_trap_printk allows to pass normal printk() messages to kdb via
vkdb_printk(). For example, it is used to get backtrace using the
classic show_stack(), see kdb_show_stack().
vkdb_printf() tries to avoid a potential infinite loop by disabling the
trap. But this approach is racy, for example:
CPU1 CPU2
vkdb_printf()
// assume that kdb_trap_printk == 0
saved_trap_printk = kdb_trap_printk;
kdb_trap_printk = 0;
kdb_show_stack()
kdb_trap_printk++;
Problem1: Now, a nested printk() on CPU0 calls vkdb_printf()
even when it should have been disabled. It will not
cause a deadlock but...
// using the outdated saved value: 0
kdb_trap_printk = saved_trap_printk;
kdb_trap_printk--;
Problem2: Now, kdb_trap_printk == -1 and will stay like this.
It means that all messages will get passed to kdb from
now on.
This patch removes the racy saved_trap_printk handling. Instead, the
recursion is prevented by a check for the locked CPU.
The solution is still kind of racy. A non-related printk(), from
another process, might get trapped by vkdb_printf(). And the wanted
printk() might not get trapped because kdb_printf_cpu is assigned. But
this problem existed even with the original code.
A proper solution would be to get_cpu() before setting kdb_trap_printk
and trap messages only from this CPU. I am not sure if it is worth the
effort, though.
In fact, the race is very theoretical. When kdb is running any of the
commands that use kdb_trap_printk there is a single active CPU and the
other CPUs should be in a holding pen inside kgdb_cpu_enter().
The only time this is violated is when there is a timeout waiting for
the other CPUs to report to the holding pen.
Finally, note that the situation is a bit schizophrenic. vkdb_printf()
explicitly allows recursion but only from KDB code that calls
kdb_printf() directly. On the other hand, the generic printk()
recursion is not allowed because it might cause an infinite loop. This
is why we could not hide the decision inside vkdb_printf() easily.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1480412276-16690-4-git-send-email-pmladek@suse.com
Signed-off-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
Cc: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|