From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, LKP <lkp@01.org>,
kernel-team@lge.com
Subject: Re: [lockdep] b09be676e0 BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 000001f2
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 14:57:01 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171010055701.GE3323@X58A-UD3R> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171004083430.kajx4yvppalb7lgz@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 10:34:30AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Right, and print_circular_bug() uses @trace before it ever can be set,
> although I suspect the intention is that that only ever gets called from
> commit_xhlock() where we pass in an initialized @trace. A comment
> would've been good :/
>
> So the whole point of that trace wankery here is to not do save_trace()
> when we'll not in fact use the stack trace.
>
> It seems to me we can do that much saner by actually initializing our
> @trace buffer and testing if it contains an actual stacktrace.
>
> Also killed that verbose thing, because dropping that graph_lock thing
> hurts my brain -- although I think it should work.
>
> Does this make the corruption thing go away?
The commit ae813308f(locking/lockdep: Avoid creating redundant links)
seems to introduce the bug.
But as you may think, another commit ce07a9415(locking/lockdep: Make
check_prev_add() able to handle external stack_trace) is also fragile.
So I like your following patch which makes code robust.
Acked-by: byungchul.park@lge.com
> ---
> kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++----------------------------
> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> index 44c8d0d17170..e36e652d996f 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> @@ -1873,10 +1873,10 @@ check_prev_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *prev,
> struct held_lock *next, int distance, struct stack_trace *trace,
> int (*save)(struct stack_trace *trace))
> {
> + struct lock_list *uninitialized_var(target_entry);
> struct lock_list *entry;
> - int ret;
> struct lock_list this;
> - struct lock_list *uninitialized_var(target_entry);
> + int ret;
>
> /*
> * Prove that the new <prev> -> <next> dependency would not
> @@ -1890,8 +1890,17 @@ check_prev_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *prev,
> this.class = hlock_class(next);
> this.parent = NULL;
> ret = check_noncircular(&this, hlock_class(prev), &target_entry);
> - if (unlikely(!ret))
> + if (unlikely(!ret)) {
> + if (!trace->entries) {
> + /*
> + * If @save fails here, the printing might trigger
> + * a WARN but because of the !nr_entries it should
> + * not do bad things.
> + */
> + save(trace);
> + }
> return print_circular_bug(&this, target_entry, next, prev, trace);
> + }
> else if (unlikely(ret < 0))
> return print_bfs_bug(ret);
>
> @@ -1938,7 +1947,7 @@ check_prev_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *prev,
> return print_bfs_bug(ret);
>
>
> - if (save && !save(trace))
> + if (!trace->entries && !save(trace))
> return 0;
>
> /*
> @@ -1958,20 +1967,6 @@ check_prev_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *prev,
> if (!ret)
> return 0;
>
> - /*
> - * Debugging printouts:
> - */
> - if (verbose(hlock_class(prev)) || verbose(hlock_class(next))) {
> - graph_unlock();
> - printk("\n new dependency: ");
> - print_lock_name(hlock_class(prev));
> - printk(KERN_CONT " => ");
> - print_lock_name(hlock_class(next));
> - printk(KERN_CONT "\n");
> - dump_stack();
> - if (!graph_lock())
> - return 0;
> - }
> return 2;
> }
>
> @@ -1986,8 +1981,12 @@ check_prevs_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *next)
> {
> int depth = curr->lockdep_depth;
> struct held_lock *hlock;
> - struct stack_trace trace;
> - int (*save)(struct stack_trace *trace) = save_trace;
> + struct stack_trace trace = {
> + .nr_entries = 0,
> + .max_entries = 0,
> + .entries = NULL,
> + .skip = 0,
> + };
>
> /*
> * Debugging checks.
> @@ -2018,17 +2017,10 @@ check_prevs_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *next)
> */
> if (hlock->read != 2 && hlock->check) {
> int ret = check_prev_add(curr, hlock, next,
> - distance, &trace, save);
> + distance, &trace, save_trace);
> if (!ret)
> return 0;
>
> - /*
> - * Stop saving stack_trace if save_trace() was
> - * called at least once:
> - */
> - if (save && ret == 2)
> - save = NULL;
> -
> /*
> * Stop after the first non-trylock entry,
> * as non-trylock entries have added their
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-10 5:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-03 14:06 [lockdep] b09be676e0 BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 000001f2 Fengguang Wu
2017-10-03 14:31 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-10-03 14:41 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-10-03 15:05 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-10-03 16:28 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-10-03 17:34 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-10-03 21:44 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-10-04 21:06 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-10-04 21:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-10-04 22:15 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-10-04 22:40 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-10-05 11:02 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-10-05 13:57 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-10-04 8:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-10-10 5:57 ` Byungchul Park [this message]
2017-10-03 16:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-10-03 16:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-10-10 5:48 ` Byungchul Park
2017-10-10 16:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-10-10 16:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-10-10 18:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-10-10 18:38 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-10-11 1:14 ` Byungchul Park
2017-10-11 2:36 ` Byungchul Park
2017-10-11 0:56 ` Byungchul Park
2017-10-11 1:02 ` Byungchul Park
2017-10-12 1:15 ` Byungchul Park
2017-10-03 17:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-10-04 9:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-10-04 10:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-10-04 14:15 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-10-10 5:30 ` Byungchul Park
2017-10-05 13:01 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-10-05 14:54 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-10-09 10:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-10-09 12:21 ` Fengguang Wu
2017-10-09 12:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-10-09 12:59 ` Fengguang Wu
2017-10-09 13:03 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-10-09 12:55 ` Fengguang Wu
2017-10-09 13:26 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-10-09 14:17 ` Fengguang Wu
2017-10-09 15:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-10-09 15:41 ` Fengguang Wu
2017-10-09 15:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-10-09 15:47 ` Fengguang Wu
2017-10-10 5:08 ` Byungchul Park
2017-10-12 8:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-10-12 9:21 ` Fengguang Wu
2017-10-12 9:28 ` Fengguang Wu
2017-10-12 11:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20171010055701.GE3323@X58A-UD3R \
--to=byungchul.park@lge.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=kernel-team@lge.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@01.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
/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