* Re: dump, restore
[not found] ` <be039a4b-639d-3b15-58e0-e7f2ff104240@linux-m68k.org>
@ 2024-08-10 0:42 ` Finn Thain
2024-08-10 3:15 ` Michael Schmitz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Finn Thain @ 2024-08-10 0:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-m68k; +Cc: debian-68k, Stan Johnson
On Fri, 9 Aug 2024, I wrote:
>
> On Sat, 3 Aug 2024, Stan Johnson wrote:
>
> >
> > Using "-a" appears to be a better option than just specifying a really
> > long tape size. Unfortunately, it also doesn't work. The problem seems
> > to affect only m68k; ppc-32, ppc-64, x86-32 and x86-64 all work as
> > expected...
>
> I reproduced the problem in QEMU and found it went away when I ran dump
> under Linux v5.6. So I went through a lot of "git bisect" steps and the
> culprit appears to be commit ef2c41cf38a7 ("clone3: allow spawning
> processes into cgroups"). That seems plausible, since we are seeing an
> error from fork_clone_io() below...
>
> #ifdef __linux__
> #if defined(SYS_clone) && defined(CLONE_IO)
> pid_t
> fork_clone_io(void)
> {
> return syscall(SYS_clone, CLONE_ARGS);
> }
> #endif
> #endif
>
> That code bypasses the C library so I suppose it's not too surprising
> that different architectures give different results...
>
> Anyway, if I run dump under strace I see no CLONE_INTO_CGROUP flag:
>
> clone(child_stack=NULL, flags=CLONE_IO|SIGCHLD) = -1 EBADF (Bad file
> descriptor)
>
> The -EBADF result was introduced into cgroup_css_set_fork() by the
> commit above. That should not happen unless CLONE_INTO_CGROUP was set,
> but strace says its not. So I don't know what's going on here.
>
Here's what gdb says, FWIW...
# gdb
GNU gdb (Debian 13.1-3) 13.1
...
(gdb) file /usr/sbin/dump
Reading symbols from /usr/sbin/dump...
Reading symbols from /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/24/071a827207bee9c025d364137514447279302b.debug...
(gdb) run -0f /dev/null /dev/sda
Starting program: /usr/sbin/dump -0f /dev/null /dev/sda
DUMP: Date of this level 0 dump: Fri Aug 9 23:37:15 2024
DUMP: Dumping /dev/sda (an unlisted file system) to /dev/null
DUMP: Label: none
DUMP: Writing 10 Kilobyte records
DUMP: mapping (Pass I) [regular files]
DUMP: mapping (Pass II) [directories]
DUMP: estimated 3595695 blocks.
DUMP: Context save fork fails in parent 671
[Inferior 1 (process 671) exited with code 03]
(gdb) b fork_clone_io
Breakpoint 1 at 0x80009dbc: file tape.c, line 740.
(gdb) run -0f /dev/null /dev/sda
Starting program: /usr/sbin/dump -0f /dev/null /dev/sda
DUMP: Date of this level 0 dump: Fri Aug 9 23:38:17 2024
DUMP: Dumping /dev/sda (an unlisted file system) to /dev/null
DUMP: Label: none
DUMP: Writing 10 Kilobyte records
DUMP: mapping (Pass I) [regular files]
DUMP: mapping (Pass II) [directories]
DUMP: estimated 3595695 blocks.
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x00000001 in ?? ()
(gdb) l fork_clone_io
warning: Source file is more recent than executable.
735
736 #ifdef __linux__
737 #if defined(SYS_clone) && defined(CLONE_IO)
738 pid_t
739 fork_clone_io(void)
740 {
741 pid_t res,parent;
742 parent=getppid(); /* az hackety hack... */
743
744 res=syscall(SYS_clone, CLONE_ARGS);
745 getppid();
746 /* as per clone call manpage: caching! */
747 getpid();
748 #ifdef __alpha__
749 syscall(SYS_getxpid);
750 #else
751 syscall(SYS_getpid);
752 #endif
753
754 /* az: clone manpage doesn't say jack about what the
(gdb) disas fork_clone_io
Dump of assembler code for function fork_clone_io:
0x80009dbc <+0>: movel %d3,%sp@-
0x80009dbe <+2>: movel %d2,%sp@-
0x80009dc0 <+4>: bsrl 0x80004200 <getppid@plt>
0x80009dc6 <+10>: movel %d0,%d3
0x80009dc8 <+12>: clrl %sp@-
0x80009dca <+14>: clrl %sp@-
0x80009dcc <+16>: clrl %sp@-
0x80009dce <+18>: movel #-2147483631,%sp@-
0x80009dd4 <+24>: pea 0x78
0x80009dd8 <+28>: bsrl 0x80003fd0 <syscall@plt>
0x80009dde <+34>: movel %d0,%d2
0x80009de0 <+36>: bsrl 0x80004200 <getppid@plt>
0x80009de6 <+42>: bsrl 0x80003c9c <getpid@plt>
0x80009dec <+48>: pea 0x14
0x80009df0 <+52>: bsrl 0x80003fd0 <syscall@plt>
0x80009df6 <+58>: bsrl 0x80004200 <getppid@plt>
0x80009dfc <+64>: lea %sp@(24),%sp
0x80009e00 <+68>: cmpl %d0,%d3
0x80009e02 <+70>: beqs 0x80009e06 <fork_clone_io+74>
0x80009e04 <+72>: clrl %d2
0x80009e06 <+74>: movel %d2,%d0
0x80009e08 <+76>: movel %sp@+,%d2
0x80009e0a <+78>: movel %sp@+,%d3
0x80009e0c <+80>: rts
End of assembler dump.
(gdb)
Is this clone syscall (0x78) really executing sys_clone3()? Also,
-2147483631 == CLONE_IO|SIGCHLD like strace said.
And why does it crash when I set a break point?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: dump, restore
2024-08-10 0:42 ` dump, restore Finn Thain
@ 2024-08-10 3:15 ` Michael Schmitz
2024-08-10 5:30 ` Finn Thain
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Michael Schmitz @ 2024-08-10 3:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Finn Thain, linux-m68k; +Cc: debian-68k, Stan Johnson
Hi Finn,
Am 10.08.2024 um 12:42 schrieb Finn Thain:
>
> On Fri, 9 Aug 2024, I wrote:
>
>>
>> On Sat, 3 Aug 2024, Stan Johnson wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Using "-a" appears to be a better option than just specifying a really
>>> long tape size. Unfortunately, it also doesn't work. The problem seems
>>> to affect only m68k; ppc-32, ppc-64, x86-32 and x86-64 all work as
>>> expected...
>>
>> I reproduced the problem in QEMU and found it went away when I ran dump
>> under Linux v5.6. So I went through a lot of "git bisect" steps and the
>> culprit appears to be commit ef2c41cf38a7 ("clone3: allow spawning
>> processes into cgroups"). That seems plausible, since we are seeing an
>> error from fork_clone_io() below...
>>
>> #ifdef __linux__
>> #if defined(SYS_clone) && defined(CLONE_IO)
>> pid_t
>> fork_clone_io(void)
>> {
>> return syscall(SYS_clone, CLONE_ARGS);
>> }
>> #endif
>> #endif
>>
>> That code bypasses the C library so I suppose it's not too surprising
>> that different architectures give different results...
>>
>> Anyway, if I run dump under strace I see no CLONE_INTO_CGROUP flag:
strace may not be aware of the CLONE_INTO_CGROUP flag yet? How old is
your strace binary?
>> clone(child_stack=NULL, flags=CLONE_IO|SIGCHLD) = -1 EBADF (Bad file
>> descriptor)
>>
>> The -EBADF result was introduced into cgroup_css_set_fork() by the
>> commit above. That should not happen unless CLONE_INTO_CGROUP was set,
>> but strace says its not. So I don't know what's going on here.
>>
>
> Here's what gdb says, FWIW...
>
> # gdb
> GNU gdb (Debian 13.1-3) 13.1
> ...
> (gdb) file /usr/sbin/dump
> Reading symbols from /usr/sbin/dump...
> Reading symbols from /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/24/071a827207bee9c025d364137514447279302b.debug...
> (gdb) run -0f /dev/null /dev/sda
> Starting program: /usr/sbin/dump -0f /dev/null /dev/sda
> DUMP: Date of this level 0 dump: Fri Aug 9 23:37:15 2024
> DUMP: Dumping /dev/sda (an unlisted file system) to /dev/null
> DUMP: Label: none
> DUMP: Writing 10 Kilobyte records
> DUMP: mapping (Pass I) [regular files]
> DUMP: mapping (Pass II) [directories]
> DUMP: estimated 3595695 blocks.
> DUMP: Context save fork fails in parent 671
> [Inferior 1 (process 671) exited with code 03]
> (gdb) b fork_clone_io
> Breakpoint 1 at 0x80009dbc: file tape.c, line 740.
> (gdb) run -0f /dev/null /dev/sda
> Starting program: /usr/sbin/dump -0f /dev/null /dev/sda
> DUMP: Date of this level 0 dump: Fri Aug 9 23:38:17 2024
> DUMP: Dumping /dev/sda (an unlisted file system) to /dev/null
> DUMP: Label: none
> DUMP: Writing 10 Kilobyte records
> DUMP: mapping (Pass I) [regular files]
> DUMP: mapping (Pass II) [directories]
> DUMP: estimated 3595695 blocks.
>
> Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
> 0x00000001 in ?? ()
> (gdb) l fork_clone_io
> warning: Source file is more recent than executable.
> 735
> 736 #ifdef __linux__
> 737 #if defined(SYS_clone) && defined(CLONE_IO)
> 738 pid_t
> 739 fork_clone_io(void)
> 740 {
> 741 pid_t res,parent;
> 742 parent=getppid(); /* az hackety hack... */
> 743
> 744 res=syscall(SYS_clone, CLONE_ARGS);
> 745 getppid();
> 746 /* as per clone call manpage: caching! */
> 747 getpid();
> 748 #ifdef __alpha__
> 749 syscall(SYS_getxpid);
> 750 #else
> 751 syscall(SYS_getpid);
> 752 #endif
> 753
> 754 /* az: clone manpage doesn't say jack about what the
> (gdb) disas fork_clone_io
> Dump of assembler code for function fork_clone_io:
> 0x80009dbc <+0>: movel %d3,%sp@-
> 0x80009dbe <+2>: movel %d2,%sp@-
> 0x80009dc0 <+4>: bsrl 0x80004200 <getppid@plt>
> 0x80009dc6 <+10>: movel %d0,%d3
> 0x80009dc8 <+12>: clrl %sp@-
> 0x80009dca <+14>: clrl %sp@-
> 0x80009dcc <+16>: clrl %sp@-
> 0x80009dce <+18>: movel #-2147483631,%sp@-
> 0x80009dd4 <+24>: pea 0x78
> 0x80009dd8 <+28>: bsrl 0x80003fd0 <syscall@plt>
> 0x80009dde <+34>: movel %d0,%d2
> 0x80009de0 <+36>: bsrl 0x80004200 <getppid@plt>
> 0x80009de6 <+42>: bsrl 0x80003c9c <getpid@plt>
> 0x80009dec <+48>: pea 0x14
> 0x80009df0 <+52>: bsrl 0x80003fd0 <syscall@plt>
> 0x80009df6 <+58>: bsrl 0x80004200 <getppid@plt>
> 0x80009dfc <+64>: lea %sp@(24),%sp
> 0x80009e00 <+68>: cmpl %d0,%d3
> 0x80009e02 <+70>: beqs 0x80009e06 <fork_clone_io+74>
> 0x80009e04 <+72>: clrl %d2
> 0x80009e06 <+74>: movel %d2,%d0
> 0x80009e08 <+76>: movel %sp@+,%d2
> 0x80009e0a <+78>: movel %sp@+,%d3
> 0x80009e0c <+80>: rts
> End of assembler dump.
> (gdb)
>
> Is this clone syscall (0x78) really executing sys_clone3()? Also,
Nope, syscall no. 120 calls __sys_clone() which in turn calls
m68k_clone() which emulates sys_clone() (roundabout way due to different
calling conventions on m68k).
clone3 is syscall 435 (calling __sys_clone3() -> m68k_clone3() ->
sys_clone3()).
But as long as syscall() takes care of the calling convention, I see no
reason why that way of calling sys_clone() would fail.
Cheers,
Michael
> -2147483631 == CLONE_IO|SIGCHLD like strace said.
>
> And why does it crash when I set a break point?
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: dump, restore
2024-08-10 3:15 ` Michael Schmitz
@ 2024-08-10 5:30 ` Finn Thain
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Finn Thain @ 2024-08-10 5:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael Schmitz; +Cc: linux-m68k, debian-68k, Stan Johnson
On Sat, 10 Aug 2024, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> >> Anyway, if I run dump under strace I see no CLONE_INTO_CGROUP flag:
>
> strace may not be aware of the CLONE_INTO_CGROUP flag yet? How old is
> your strace binary?
>
I don't think strace is the problem. If it was, we should still see all
the flags in the disassembly, in the constant passed to the syscall.
> >> clone(child_stack=NULL, flags=CLONE_IO|SIGCHLD) = -1 EBADF (Bad file
> >> descriptor)
> >>
> >> The -EBADF result was introduced into cgroup_css_set_fork() by the
> >> commit above. That should not happen unless CLONE_INTO_CGROUP was set,
> >> but strace says its not. So I don't know what's going on here.
> >>
> >
> > Here's what gdb says, FWIW...
> >
> > # gdb
> > GNU gdb (Debian 13.1-3) 13.1
> > ...
> > (gdb) file /usr/sbin/dump
> > Reading symbols from /usr/sbin/dump...
> > Reading symbols from
> > /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/24/071a827207bee9c025d364137514447279302b.debug...
> > (gdb) run -0f /dev/null /dev/sda
> > Starting program: /usr/sbin/dump -0f /dev/null /dev/sda
> > DUMP: Date of this level 0 dump: Fri Aug 9 23:37:15 2024
> > DUMP: Dumping /dev/sda (an unlisted file system) to /dev/null
> > DUMP: Label: none
> > DUMP: Writing 10 Kilobyte records
> > DUMP: mapping (Pass I) [regular files]
> > DUMP: mapping (Pass II) [directories]
> > DUMP: estimated 3595695 blocks.
> > DUMP: Context save fork fails in parent 671
> > [Inferior 1 (process 671) exited with code 03]
> > (gdb) b fork_clone_io
> > Breakpoint 1 at 0x80009dbc: file tape.c, line 740.
> > (gdb) run -0f /dev/null /dev/sda
> > Starting program: /usr/sbin/dump -0f /dev/null /dev/sda
> > DUMP: Date of this level 0 dump: Fri Aug 9 23:38:17 2024
> > DUMP: Dumping /dev/sda (an unlisted file system) to /dev/null
> > DUMP: Label: none
> > DUMP: Writing 10 Kilobyte records
> > DUMP: mapping (Pass I) [regular files]
> > DUMP: mapping (Pass II) [directories]
> > DUMP: estimated 3595695 blocks.
> >
> > Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
> > 0x00000001 in ?? ()
> > (gdb) l fork_clone_io
> > warning: Source file is more recent than executable.
> > 735
> > 736 #ifdef __linux__
> > 737 #if defined(SYS_clone) && defined(CLONE_IO)
> > 738 pid_t
> > 739 fork_clone_io(void)
> > 740 {
> > 741 pid_t res,parent;
> > 742 parent=getppid(); /* az hackety hack... */
> > 743
> > 744 res=syscall(SYS_clone, CLONE_ARGS);
> > 745 getppid();
> > 746 /* as per clone call manpage: caching! */
> > 747 getpid();
> > 748 #ifdef __alpha__
> > 749 syscall(SYS_getxpid);
> > 750 #else
> > 751 syscall(SYS_getpid);
> > 752 #endif
> > 753
> > 754 /* az: clone manpage doesn't say jack about what the
> > (gdb) disas fork_clone_io
> > Dump of assembler code for function fork_clone_io:
> > 0x80009dbc <+0>: movel %d3,%sp@-
> > 0x80009dbe <+2>: movel %d2,%sp@-
> > 0x80009dc0 <+4>: bsrl 0x80004200 <getppid@plt>
> > 0x80009dc6 <+10>: movel %d0,%d3
> > 0x80009dc8 <+12>: clrl %sp@-
> > 0x80009dca <+14>: clrl %sp@-
> > 0x80009dcc <+16>: clrl %sp@-
> > 0x80009dce <+18>: movel #-2147483631,%sp@-
> > 0x80009dd4 <+24>: pea 0x78
> > 0x80009dd8 <+28>: bsrl 0x80003fd0 <syscall@plt>
> > 0x80009dde <+34>: movel %d0,%d2
> > 0x80009de0 <+36>: bsrl 0x80004200 <getppid@plt>
> > 0x80009de6 <+42>: bsrl 0x80003c9c <getpid@plt>
> > 0x80009dec <+48>: pea 0x14
> > 0x80009df0 <+52>: bsrl 0x80003fd0 <syscall@plt>
> > 0x80009df6 <+58>: bsrl 0x80004200 <getppid@plt>
> > 0x80009dfc <+64>: lea %sp@(24),%sp
> > 0x80009e00 <+68>: cmpl %d0,%d3
> > 0x80009e02 <+70>: beqs 0x80009e06 <fork_clone_io+74>
> > 0x80009e04 <+72>: clrl %d2
> > 0x80009e06 <+74>: movel %d2,%d0
> > 0x80009e08 <+76>: movel %sp@+,%d2
> > 0x80009e0a <+78>: movel %sp@+,%d3
> > 0x80009e0c <+80>: rts
> > End of assembler dump.
> > (gdb)
> >
> > Is this clone syscall (0x78) really executing sys_clone3()? Also,
>
> Nope, syscall no. 120 calls __sys_clone() which in turn calls
> m68k_clone() which emulates sys_clone() (roundabout way due to different
> calling conventions on m68k).
>
> clone3 is syscall 435 (calling __sys_clone3() -> m68k_clone3() ->
> sys_clone3()).
>
What confused me was that 'git bisect' fingered what looked like a clone3
patch, but it turns out that this patch affects anything that calls
cgroup_can_fork(), that is, any syscalls that call copy_process().
> But as long as syscall() takes care of the calling convention, I see no
> reason why that way of calling sys_clone() would fail.
>
The interesting thing about the calling convention is that the flags make
up a 32-bit quantity when passed to clone as an int, and a 64-bit quantity
when passed to clone3 as struct clone_args.flags.
So I've just added some printk() statements and found that m68k_clone()
messed up the flags in the kernel_clone_args struct: I'm seeing
0xFFFFFFFF80000000 which explains how CLONE_INTO_CGROUP got set.
I'll send a patch.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-08-10 5:30 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <6d0e0caf-6d32-c7d0-c02c-42830d9636d0.ref@yahoo.com>
[not found] ` <6d0e0caf-6d32-c7d0-c02c-42830d9636d0@yahoo.com>
[not found] ` <ebf3c8dd-9c1d-602d-2f7a-9adb99950264@linux-m68k.org>
[not found] ` <b18c5784-6f21-9a2c-422d-b6fd4c4811dc@yahoo.com>
[not found] ` <be039a4b-639d-3b15-58e0-e7f2ff104240@linux-m68k.org>
2024-08-10 0:42 ` dump, restore Finn Thain
2024-08-10 3:15 ` Michael Schmitz
2024-08-10 5:30 ` Finn Thain
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox