| Message ID | 20181130150859.27366-1-anders.roxell@linaro.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [1/3] stackleak: mark stackleak_track_stack() as notrace | expand |
On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 16:08:59 +0100 Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> wrote: > Function graph tracing recurses into itself when stackleak is enabled, > causing the ftrace graph selftest to run for up to 90 seconds and > trigger the softlockup watchdog. > > Breakpoint 2, ftrace_graph_caller () at ../arch/arm64/kernel/entry-ftrace.S:200 > 200 mcount_get_lr_addr x0 // pointer to function's saved lr > (gdb) bt > \#0 ftrace_graph_caller () at ../arch/arm64/kernel/entry-ftrace.S:200 > \#1 0xffffff80081d5280 in ftrace_caller () at ../arch/arm64/kernel/entry-ftrace.S:153 > \#2 0xffffff8008555484 in stackleak_track_stack () at ../kernel/stackleak.c:106 > \#3 0xffffff8008421ff8 in ftrace_ops_test (ops=0xffffff8009eaa840 <graph_ops>, ip=18446743524091297036, regs=<optimized out>) at ../kernel/trace/ftrace.c:1507 > \#4 0xffffff8008428770 in __ftrace_ops_list_func (regs=<optimized out>, ignored=<optimized out>, parent_ip=<optimized out>, ip=<optimized out>) at ../kernel/trace/ftrace.c:6286 > \#5 ftrace_ops_no_ops (ip=18446743524091297036, parent_ip=18446743524091242824) at ../kernel/trace/ftrace.c:6321 > \#6 0xffffff80081d5280 in ftrace_caller () at ../arch/arm64/kernel/entry-ftrace.S:153 > \#7 0xffffff800832fd10 in irq_find_mapping (domain=0xffffffc03fc4bc80, hwirq=27) at ../kernel/irq/irqdomain.c:876 > \#8 0xffffff800832294c in __handle_domain_irq (domain=0xffffffc03fc4bc80, hwirq=27, lookup=true, regs=0xffffff800814b840) at ../kernel/irq/irqdesc.c:650 > \#9 0xffffff80081d52b4 in ftrace_graph_caller () at ../arch/arm64/kernel/entry-ftrace.S:205 > > Rework so we mark stackleak_track_stack as notrace > > Co-developed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> Acked-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@goodmis.org> -- Steve > --- > kernel/stackleak.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/stackleak.c b/kernel/stackleak.c > index e42892926244..5de3bf596dd7 100644 > --- a/kernel/stackleak.c > +++ b/kernel/stackleak.c > @@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ asmlinkage void stackleak_erase(void) > current->lowest_stack = current_top_of_stack() - THREAD_SIZE/64; > } > > -void __used stackleak_track_stack(void) > +void __used notrace stackleak_track_stack(void) > { > /* > * N.B. stackleak_erase() fills the kernel stack with the poison value,
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 7:09 AM Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> wrote: > > Function graph tracing recurses into itself when stackleak is enabled, > causing the ftrace graph selftest to run for up to 90 seconds and > trigger the softlockup watchdog. > > Breakpoint 2, ftrace_graph_caller () at ../arch/arm64/kernel/entry-ftrace.S:200 > 200 mcount_get_lr_addr x0 // pointer to function's saved lr > (gdb) bt > \#0 ftrace_graph_caller () at ../arch/arm64/kernel/entry-ftrace.S:200 > \#1 0xffffff80081d5280 in ftrace_caller () at ../arch/arm64/kernel/entry-ftrace.S:153 > \#2 0xffffff8008555484 in stackleak_track_stack () at ../kernel/stackleak.c:106 > \#3 0xffffff8008421ff8 in ftrace_ops_test (ops=0xffffff8009eaa840 <graph_ops>, ip=18446743524091297036, regs=<optimized out>) at ../kernel/trace/ftrace.c:1507 > \#4 0xffffff8008428770 in __ftrace_ops_list_func (regs=<optimized out>, ignored=<optimized out>, parent_ip=<optimized out>, ip=<optimized out>) at ../kernel/trace/ftrace.c:6286 > \#5 ftrace_ops_no_ops (ip=18446743524091297036, parent_ip=18446743524091242824) at ../kernel/trace/ftrace.c:6321 > \#6 0xffffff80081d5280 in ftrace_caller () at ../arch/arm64/kernel/entry-ftrace.S:153 > \#7 0xffffff800832fd10 in irq_find_mapping (domain=0xffffffc03fc4bc80, hwirq=27) at ../kernel/irq/irqdomain.c:876 > \#8 0xffffff800832294c in __handle_domain_irq (domain=0xffffffc03fc4bc80, hwirq=27, lookup=true, regs=0xffffff800814b840) at ../kernel/irq/irqdesc.c:650 > \#9 0xffffff80081d52b4 in ftrace_graph_caller () at ../arch/arm64/kernel/entry-ftrace.S:205 > > Rework so we mark stackleak_track_stack as notrace > > Co-developed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> > --- > kernel/stackleak.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/stackleak.c b/kernel/stackleak.c > index e42892926244..5de3bf596dd7 100644 > --- a/kernel/stackleak.c > +++ b/kernel/stackleak.c > @@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ asmlinkage void stackleak_erase(void) > current->lowest_stack = current_top_of_stack() - THREAD_SIZE/64; > } > > -void __used stackleak_track_stack(void) > +void __used notrace stackleak_track_stack(void) > { > /* > * N.B. stackleak_erase() fills the kernel stack with the poison value, > -- > 2.19.2 > Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Steven, I assume this series going via your tree?
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 17:08:34 -0800 Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote: > > diff --git a/kernel/stackleak.c b/kernel/stackleak.c > > index e42892926244..5de3bf596dd7 100644 > > --- a/kernel/stackleak.c > > +++ b/kernel/stackleak.c > > @@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ asmlinkage void stackleak_erase(void) > > current->lowest_stack = current_top_of_stack() - THREAD_SIZE/64; > > } > > > > -void __used stackleak_track_stack(void) > > +void __used notrace stackleak_track_stack(void) > > { > > /* > > * N.B. stackleak_erase() fills the kernel stack with the poison value, > > -- > > 2.19.2 > > > > Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> > > Steven, I assume this series going via your tree? ?? A notrace addition doesn't make it mine. I added changes for the cond_resched in a different patch series that I'll pull in (they are independent from this). I'll Ack the Makefile change in the tracing directory, but the rest belongs to others. -- Steve
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 21:26:51 -0500 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 17:08:34 -0800 > Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote: > > I'll Ack the Makefile > change in the tracing directory, but the rest belongs to others. > I see I already acked that patch. BTW, when sending a patch series, you really need a 0/3 patch as a header and the rest be threaded. I had a hard time finding that patch in the sea of my INBOX. If I was the one to pull it in, I wouldn't do it if the series was unthreaded like this. -- Steve
On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 6:29 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 21:26:51 -0500 > Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 17:08:34 -0800 > > Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote: > > > > > I'll Ack the Makefile > > change in the tracing directory, but the rest belongs to others. Okay, I wasn't sure. Anders's patch was marked "1/3" so I thought it was directed at you. :) I'll grab this one in the gcc-plugins tree. -Kees
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 19:29:11 -0800 Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 6:29 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 21:26:51 -0500 > > Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 17:08:34 -0800 > > > Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > I'll Ack the Makefile > > > change in the tracing directory, but the rest belongs to others. > > Okay, I wasn't sure. Anders's patch was marked "1/3" so I thought it > was directed at you. :) > > I'll grab this one in the gcc-plugins tree. Should I just take patch 2 then? I'm thinking it's independent too. I'm collecting patches for the next merge window right now so it wont really be an issue if I do. -- Steve
On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 7:43 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 19:29:11 -0800 > Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 6:29 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 21:26:51 -0500 > > > Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 17:08:34 -0800 > > > > Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I'll Ack the Makefile > > > > change in the tracing directory, but the rest belongs to others. > > > > Okay, I wasn't sure. Anders's patch was marked "1/3" so I thought it > > was directed at you. :) > > > > I'll grab this one in the gcc-plugins tree. > > Should I just take patch 2 then? I'm thinking it's independent too. > > I'm collecting patches for the next merge window right now so it wont > really be an issue if I do. Sure! I'm not sure what Anders's intention was, but yeah. :)
diff --git a/kernel/stackleak.c b/kernel/stackleak.c index e42892926244..5de3bf596dd7 100644 --- a/kernel/stackleak.c +++ b/kernel/stackleak.c @@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ asmlinkage void stackleak_erase(void) current->lowest_stack = current_top_of_stack() - THREAD_SIZE/64; } -void __used stackleak_track_stack(void) +void __used notrace stackleak_track_stack(void) { /* * N.B. stackleak_erase() fills the kernel stack with the poison value,