From: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ted Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] printk: Add %ptc to safely print a task's comm
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 18:10:46 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1305076246.2939.67.camel@work-vm> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1305075090.19586.189.camel@Joe-Laptop>
On Tue, 2011-05-10 at 17:51 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-05-10 at 17:23 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> > Acessing task->comm requires proper locking. However in the past
> > access to current->comm could be done without locking. This
> > is no longer the case, so all comm access needs to be done
> > while holding the comm_lock.
> >
> > In my attempt to clean up unprotected comm access, I've noticed
> > most comm access is done for printk output. To simpify correct
> > locking in these cases, I've introduced a new %ptc format,
> > which will safely print the corresponding task's comm.
>
> Hi John.
>
> Couple of tyops for Accessing and simplify in your commit message
> and a few comments on the patch.
Ah. Yes. Thanks!
> Could misuse of %ptc (not using current) cause system lockup?
It very well could. Although I don't see other %p options tring to
handle invalid pointers. Any suggestions on how to best handle this?
> > Example use:
> > printk("%ptc: unaligned epc - sending SIGBUS.\n", current);
>
>
> > diff --git a/lib/vsprintf.c b/lib/vsprintf.c
> > index bc0ac6b..b9c97b8 100644
> > --- a/lib/vsprintf.c
> > +++ b/lib/vsprintf.c
> > @@ -797,6 +797,26 @@ char *uuid_string(char *buf, char *end, const u8 *addr,
> > return string(buf, end, uuid, spec);
> > }
> >
> > +static noinline_for_stack
> > +char *task_comm_string(char *buf, char *end, u8 *addr,
> > + struct printf_spec spec, const char *fmt)
>
> addr should be void * not u8 *
>
> > +{
> > + struct task_struct *tsk = (struct task_struct *) addr;
>
> no cast.
>
> Maybe it'd be better to use current inside this routine and not
> pass the pointer at all.
That sounds reasonable. Most users are current, so forcing the more rare
non-current users to copy it to a buffer first and use the normal %s
would not be of much impact.
Although I'm not sure if there's precedent for a %p value that didn't
take a argument. Thoughts on that? Anyone else have an opinion here?
Thanks so much for the review and feedback!
-john
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-11 1:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-11 0:23 [RFC][PATCH 0/3] v2 Improve task->comm locking situation John Stultz
2011-05-11 0:23 ` [PATCH 1/3] comm: Introduce comm_lock seqlock to protect task->comm access John Stultz
2011-05-11 17:39 ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-12 22:00 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-11 0:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] printk: Add %ptc to safely print a task's comm John Stultz
2011-05-11 0:51 ` Joe Perches
2011-05-11 1:10 ` John Stultz [this message]
2011-05-11 1:16 ` john stultz
2011-05-11 1:20 ` Joe Perches
2011-05-12 22:12 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-12 22:29 ` Joe Perches
2011-05-13 21:56 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-12 22:10 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-11 9:33 ` Américo Wang
2011-05-11 21:02 ` John Stultz
2011-05-12 10:43 ` Américo Wang
2011-05-12 10:45 ` Américo Wang
2011-05-12 18:01 ` John Stultz
2011-05-11 17:36 ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-11 21:04 ` John Stultz
2011-05-11 0:23 ` [PATCH 3/3] comm: ext4: Protect task->comm access by using %ptc John Stultz
2011-05-12 22:14 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-12 22:29 ` John Stultz
2011-05-12 22:34 ` Andrew Morton
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-05-12 23:02 [PATCH 0/3] v3 Improve task->comm locking situation John Stultz
2011-05-12 23:02 ` [PATCH 2/3] printk: Add %ptc to safely print a task's comm John Stultz
2011-05-16 21:19 [PATCH 0/3] v4 Improve task->comm locking situation John Stultz
2011-05-16 21:19 ` [PATCH 2/3] printk: Add %ptc to safely print a task's comm John Stultz
2011-05-16 21:54 ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-16 23:10 ` John Stultz
2011-05-16 23:56 ` Joe Perches
2011-05-17 0:11 ` John Stultz
2011-05-17 7:21 ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-18 0:32 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-17 20:47 [PATCH 0/3] v5 Improve task->comm locking situation John Stultz
2011-05-17 20:47 ` [PATCH 2/3] printk: Add %ptc to safely print a task's comm John Stultz
2011-05-17 21:42 ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-17 21:52 ` Joe Perches
2011-05-17 22:04 ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-17 22:17 ` Joe Perches
2011-05-17 22:17 ` John Stultz
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=1305076246.2939.67.camel@work-vm \
--to=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).