From: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com>
To: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ftrace: protect executing nmi
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 13:42:52 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1237225372.3624.15.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49BE4BF7.6050407@cn.fujitsu.com>
On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 20:54 +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> When I review the sensitive code ftrace_nmi_enter(), I found
> the atomic variable nmi_running does protect NMI VS do_ftrace_mod_code(),
> but it can not protects NMI(entered nmi) VS NMI(ftrace_nmi_enter()).
>
> cpu#1 | cpu#2 | cpu#3
> ftrace_nmi_enter() | do_ftrace_mod_code() |
> not modify | |
> ------------------------|-----------------------|--
> executing | set mod_code_write = 1|
> executing --|-----------------------|--------------------
> executing | | ftrace_nmi_enter()
> executing | | do modify
> ------------------------|-----------------------|-----------------
> ftrace_nmi_exit() | |
Very good review!
This race is possible, although very unlikely, but must be fixed
regardless.
>
> cpu#3 may be being modified the code which is still being executed on cpu#1,
> it will have undefined results and possibly take a GPF, this patch
> prevents it occurred.
Unfortunately your patch does not solve the problem. It only makes the
race window smaller.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
> ---
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/ftrace.c b/arch/x86/kernel/ftrace.c
> index 1d0d7f4..e016f5e 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/ftrace.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/ftrace.c
> @@ -87,7 +87,8 @@ static unsigned char *ftrace_call_replace(unsigned long ip, unsigned long addr)
> *
> * If an NMI is executed, the first thing it does is to call
> * "ftrace_nmi_enter". This will check if the flag is set to write
> - * and if it is, it will write what is in the IP and "code" buffers.
> + * and if it is, and there is no executing nmi, it will write
> + * what is in the IP and "code" buffers.
> *
> * The trick is, it does not matter if everyone is writing the same
> * content to the code location. Also, if a CPU is executing code
> @@ -96,6 +97,7 @@ static unsigned char *ftrace_call_replace(unsigned long ip, unsigned long addr)
> */
>
> static atomic_t nmi_running = ATOMIC_INIT(0);
> +static atomic_t nmi_executing = ATOMIC_INIT(0);
> static int mod_code_status; /* holds return value of text write */
> static int mod_code_write; /* set when NMI should do the write */
> static void *mod_code_ip; /* holds the IP to write to */
> @@ -135,14 +137,18 @@ void ftrace_nmi_enter(void)
> atomic_inc(&nmi_running);
> /* Must have nmi_running seen before reading write flag */
> smp_mb();
> - if (mod_code_write) {
> + if (!atomic_read(&nmi_executing) && mod_code_write) {
> ftrace_mod_code();
> atomic_inc(&nmi_update_count);
> }
Here we have another race window. If cpu#1 has that NMI and right here
we get a SMI (something to make the race window bigger). cpu#2 could
have set the mod_code_write and cpu#3 could have another NMI that sees
it but does not see the nmi_executing flag. Now we are in the same
scenario as you nicely described up above.
> + atomic_inc(&nmi_executing);
> + smp_mb();
> }
>
> void ftrace_nmi_exit(void)
> {
> + smp_mb();
> + atomic_dec(&nmi_executing);
> /* Finish all executions before clearing nmi_running */
> smp_wmb();
> atomic_dec(&nmi_running);
>
The solution is to connect the mod_code_write with the nmi_enter and
nmi_exit. Make mod_code_write an atomic.
void ftrace_nmi_enter(void)
{
if (atomic_inc_return(&mod_code_write) > 10000) {
ftrace_mod_code();
atomic_inc(&nmi_update_count);
}
smp_mb();
}
void ftrace_nmi_exit(void)
{
smp_mb();
atomic_dec(&mod_code_write);
}
Then in do_ftrace_mod_code ...
while (atomic_cmpxchg(&mod_code_write, 0, 10001) != 0)
;
[...]
while (atomic_cmpxchg(&mode_code_write, 10001, 0) != 10001)
;
Does this look like it would solve the issue?
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-16 17:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-16 12:54 [PATCH] ftrace: protect executing nmi Lai Jiangshan
2009-03-16 17:42 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2009-03-17 12:54 ` [PATCH 1/2] ftrace: protect running nmi Lai Jiangshan
2009-03-17 12:58 ` [PATCH 2/2] ftrace: fast path for do_ftrace_mod_code() Lai Jiangshan
2009-03-17 14:39 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-03-18 7:02 ` Lai Jiangshan
2009-03-18 8:42 ` [PATCH] ftrace: protect running nmi (V3) Lai Jiangshan
2009-03-19 0:33 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-03-19 2:02 ` Lai Jiangshan
2009-03-20 10:18 ` [tip:tracing/ftrace] " Lai Jiangshan
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=1237225372.3624.15.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=srostedt@redhat.com \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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).