All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
	labbott@redhat.com, linux@armlinux.org.uk,
	stable@vger.kernel.org, steve.capper@arm.com,
	will.deacon@arm.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
	peterz@infradead.org, luto@amacapital.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: mm: abort uaccess retries upon fatal signal
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 18:18:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <596659FF.7070605@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1499782763-31418-2-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com>

Hi Mark,

On 11/07/17 15:19, Mark Rutland wrote:
> When there's a fatal signal pending, arm64's do_page_fault()
> implementation returns 0. The intent is that we'll return to the
> faulting userspace instruction, delivering the signal on the way.
> 
> However, if we take a fatal signal during fixing up a uaccess, this
> results in a return to the faulting kernel instruction, which will be
> instantly retried, resulting in the same fault being taken forever. As
> the task never reaches userspace, the signal is not delivered, and the
> task is left unkillable. While the task is stuck in this state, it can
> inhibit the forward progress of the system.
> 
> To avoid this, we must ensure that when a fatal signal is pending, we
> apply any necessary fixup for a faulting kernel instruction. Thus we
> will return to an error path, and it is up to that code to make forward
> progress towards delivering the fatal signal.

VM_FAULT_RETRY's 'I released your locks' behaviour is pretty nasty, but this
looks right. FWIW:
Reviewed-by: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>

I also gave this a spin through LTP on Juno, based on v4.12-defconfig:
Tested-by: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>


Thanks,

James

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: james.morse@arm.com (James Morse)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: mm: abort uaccess retries upon fatal signal
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 18:18:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <596659FF.7070605@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1499782763-31418-2-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com>

Hi Mark,

On 11/07/17 15:19, Mark Rutland wrote:
> When there's a fatal signal pending, arm64's do_page_fault()
> implementation returns 0. The intent is that we'll return to the
> faulting userspace instruction, delivering the signal on the way.
> 
> However, if we take a fatal signal during fixing up a uaccess, this
> results in a return to the faulting kernel instruction, which will be
> instantly retried, resulting in the same fault being taken forever. As
> the task never reaches userspace, the signal is not delivered, and the
> task is left unkillable. While the task is stuck in this state, it can
> inhibit the forward progress of the system.
> 
> To avoid this, we must ensure that when a fatal signal is pending, we
> apply any necessary fixup for a faulting kernel instruction. Thus we
> will return to an error path, and it is up to that code to make forward
> progress towards delivering the fatal signal.

VM_FAULT_RETRY's 'I released your locks' behaviour is pretty nasty, but this
looks right. FWIW:
Reviewed-by: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>

I also gave this a spin through LTP on Juno, based on v4.12-defconfig:
Tested-by: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>


Thanks,

James

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-07-12 17:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-07-11 14:19 [PATCH 0/2] Fatal signal handing within uaccess faults Mark Rutland
2017-07-11 14:19 ` Mark Rutland
2017-07-11 14:19 ` [PATCH 1/2] arm64: mm: abort uaccess retries upon fatal signal Mark Rutland
2017-07-11 14:19   ` Mark Rutland
2017-07-11 14:58   ` Will Deacon
2017-07-11 14:58     ` Will Deacon
2017-08-21 13:42     ` Mark Rutland
2017-08-21 13:42       ` Mark Rutland
2017-08-22  9:45       ` Will Deacon
2017-08-22  9:45         ` Will Deacon
2017-11-14  6:46         ` Rabin Vincent
2017-11-14  6:46           ` Rabin Vincent
2017-07-12 17:18   ` James Morse [this message]
2017-07-12 17:18     ` James Morse
2017-07-11 14:19 ` [PATCH 2/2] arm: " Mark Rutland
2017-07-11 14:19   ` Mark Rutland
2017-08-22 10:40   ` Mark Rutland
2017-08-22 10:40     ` Mark Rutland
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-07-11 14:16 [PATCH 0/2] Fatal signal handing within uaccess faults Mark Rutland
2017-07-11 14:16 ` [PATCH 1/2] arm64: mm: abort uaccess retries upon fatal signal Mark Rutland

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=596659FF.7070605@arm.com \
    --to=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=labbott@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=luto@amacapital.net \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=steve.capper@arm.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.