* [PATCH] rcu: Fix kernel stack overflow caused by kprobe on rcu_irq_enter_check_tick()
@ 2022-11-19 4:00 Zheng Yejian
2022-11-21 19:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Zheng Yejian @ 2022-11-19 4:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: paulmck, frederic, quic_neeraju, josh, rostedt, mathieu.desnoyers,
jiangshanlai, joel, rcu, linux-kernel
Cc: zhengyejian1
Register kprobe on __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() can cause kernel stack
overflow [1]. This issue is first found in v5.10 and can be reproduced
by enabling CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL and doing like:
# cd /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/
# echo 'p:mp1 __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick' >> kprobe_events
# echo 1 > events/kprobes/enable
So __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() should not be kprobed, mark it as noinstr.
[1]
Insufficient stack space to handle exception!
Insufficient stack space to handle exception!
[...]
Kernel panic - not syncing: kernel stack overflow
CPU: 3 PID: 34 Comm: migration/3 Not tainted
6.1.0-rc5-00884-g84368d882b96 #2
Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT)
Stopper: multi_cpu_stop+0x0/0x228 <- __stop_cpus.constprop.0+0xa4/0x100
Call trace:
dump_backtrace+0xf8/0x108
show_stack+0x20/0x48
dump_stack_lvl+0x68/0x84
dump_stack+0x1c/0x38
panic+0x214/0x404
add_taint+0x0/0xf0
panic_bad_stack+0x144/0x160
handle_bad_stack+0x38/0x58
__bad_stack+0x78/0x7c
el1h_64_sync_handler+0x4/0xe8
__rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8
arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20
el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90
el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8
el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68
__rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8
arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20
el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90
el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8
el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68
__rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8
arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20
el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90
el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8
el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68
__rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8
arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20
el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90
el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8
el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68
__rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8
arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20
el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90
el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8
el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68
__rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8
[...]
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Fixes: aaf2bc50df1f ("rcu: Abstract out rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() from rcu_nmi_enter()")
Signed-off-by: Zheng Yejian <zhengyejian1@huawei.com>
---
kernel/rcu/tree.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
index 93416afebd59..68230f02cfb7 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
@@ -631,7 +631,7 @@ void rcu_irq_exit_check_preempt(void)
* controlled environments, this function allows RCU to get what it
* needs without creating otherwise useless interruptions.
*/
-void __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(void)
+noinstr void __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(void)
{
struct rcu_data *rdp = this_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data);
--
2.25.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] rcu: Fix kernel stack overflow caused by kprobe on rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() 2022-11-19 4:00 [PATCH] rcu: Fix kernel stack overflow caused by kprobe on rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() Zheng Yejian @ 2022-11-21 19:57 ` Paul E. McKenney 2022-12-02 9:54 ` Zheng Yejian 2022-12-05 13:23 ` Frederic Weisbecker 0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Paul E. McKenney @ 2022-11-21 19:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Zheng Yejian Cc: frederic, quic_neeraju, josh, rostedt, mathieu.desnoyers, jiangshanlai, joel, rcu, linux-kernel On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 12:00:49PM +0800, Zheng Yejian wrote: > Register kprobe on __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() can cause kernel stack > overflow [1]. This issue is first found in v5.10 and can be reproduced > by enabling CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL and doing like: > # cd /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/ > # echo 'p:mp1 __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick' >> kprobe_events > # echo 1 > events/kprobes/enable > > So __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() should not be kprobed, mark it as noinstr. Good catch! I am inclined to queue this, but noticed that one of its callers need it to be noinstr but that the others do not. Need noinstr: o enter_from_kernel_mode() -> __enter_from_kernel_mode() -> rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() -> __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() Doesn't need noinstr: o ct_nmi_enter() -> rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() -> __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(), courtesy of the call to instrumentation_begin() in ct_nmi_enter() that precedes the call to rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(). o irqentry_enter() -> rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() -> __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(), courtesy of the call to instrumentation_begin() in irqentry_enter() that precedes the call to rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(). Is tagging __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() with noinstr as proposed in this patch the right thing to do, or should there be calls to instrumentation_begin() and instrumentation_end() in enter_from_kernel_mode()? Or something else entirely? Thoughts? Thanx, Paul > [1] > Insufficient stack space to handle exception! > Insufficient stack space to handle exception! > [...] > Kernel panic - not syncing: kernel stack overflow > CPU: 3 PID: 34 Comm: migration/3 Not tainted > 6.1.0-rc5-00884-g84368d882b96 #2 > Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT) > Stopper: multi_cpu_stop+0x0/0x228 <- __stop_cpus.constprop.0+0xa4/0x100 > Call trace: > dump_backtrace+0xf8/0x108 > show_stack+0x20/0x48 > dump_stack_lvl+0x68/0x84 > dump_stack+0x1c/0x38 > panic+0x214/0x404 > add_taint+0x0/0xf0 > panic_bad_stack+0x144/0x160 > handle_bad_stack+0x38/0x58 > __bad_stack+0x78/0x7c > el1h_64_sync_handler+0x4/0xe8 > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > [...] > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > Fixes: aaf2bc50df1f ("rcu: Abstract out rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() from rcu_nmi_enter()") > Signed-off-by: Zheng Yejian <zhengyejian1@huawei.com> > --- > kernel/rcu/tree.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c > index 93416afebd59..68230f02cfb7 100644 > --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c > @@ -631,7 +631,7 @@ void rcu_irq_exit_check_preempt(void) > * controlled environments, this function allows RCU to get what it > * needs without creating otherwise useless interruptions. > */ > -void __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(void) > +noinstr void __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(void) > { > struct rcu_data *rdp = this_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data); > > -- > 2.25.1 > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] rcu: Fix kernel stack overflow caused by kprobe on rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() 2022-11-21 19:57 ` Paul E. McKenney @ 2022-12-02 9:54 ` Zheng Yejian 2022-12-02 19:24 ` Paul E. McKenney 2022-12-05 15:35 ` Frederic Weisbecker 2022-12-05 13:23 ` Frederic Weisbecker 1 sibling, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Zheng Yejian @ 2022-12-02 9:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: paulmck Cc: frederic, quic_neeraju, josh, rostedt, mathieu.desnoyers, jiangshanlai, joel, rcu, linux-kernel On 2022/11/22 03:57, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 12:00:49PM +0800, Zheng Yejian wrote: >> Register kprobe on __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() can cause kernel stack >> overflow [1]. This issue is first found in v5.10 and can be reproduced >> by enabling CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL and doing like: >> # cd /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/ >> # echo 'p:mp1 __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick' >> kprobe_events >> # echo 1 > events/kprobes/enable >> >> So __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() should not be kprobed, mark it as noinstr. > > Good catch! > > I am inclined to queue this, but noticed that one of its callers need > it to be noinstr but that the others do not. > > Need noinstr: > > o enter_from_kernel_mode() -> __enter_from_kernel_mode() -> > rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() -> __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() > > Doesn't need noinstr: > > o ct_nmi_enter() -> rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() -> > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(), courtesy of the call to > instrumentation_begin() in ct_nmi_enter() that precedes the call > to rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(). > > o irqentry_enter() -> rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() -> > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(), courtesy of the call to > instrumentation_begin() in irqentry_enter() that precedes the > call to rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(). > > Is tagging __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() with noinstr as > proposed in this patch the right thing to do, or should there > be calls to instrumentation_begin() and instrumentation_end() in > enter_from_kernel_mode()? Or something else entirely? I have tried the calls to instrumentation_{begin,end}() in enter_from_kernel_mode(), see [1]. But this problem can still be reproduced, maybe more complete calltrace info [2] is needed for analyzing. Did I add the instrumentation_{begin,end}() in wrong place or is there other caller need noinstr? [1] diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c index 27369fa1c032..deed5a0941d3 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c @@ -49,7 +49,9 @@ static __always_inline void __enter_from_kernel_mode(struct pt_regs *regs) } lockdep_hardirqs_off(CALLER_ADDR0); + instrumentation_begin(); rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(); + instrumentation_end(); trace_hardirqs_off_finish(); } [2] [ 48.921197] Call trace: [ 48.921241] dump_backtrace+0xf8/0x108 [ 48.921358] show_stack+0x20/0x48 [ 48.921418] dump_stack_lvl+0x68/0x84 [ 48.921477] dump_stack+0x1c/0x38 [ 48.921530] panic+0x214/0x404 [ 48.921598] add_taint+0x0/0xf0 [ 48.921657] panic_bad_stack+0x144/0x160 [ 48.921715] handle_bad_stack+0x38/0x58 [ 48.921774] __bad_stack+0x78/0x7c [ 48.921825] __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 [ 48.921886] arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 [ 48.921949] el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 [ 48.922001] el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 [ 48.922061] el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 [ 48.922112] __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 [...] [ 48.938382] __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 [ 48.938441] arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 [ 48.938500] el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 [ 48.938549] el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 [ 48.938607] el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 [ 48.938656] __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 [ 48.938715] arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 [ 48.938778] el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 [ 48.938829] el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 [ 48.938887] el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 [ 48.938936] __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 [ 48.938995] arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 [ 48.939054] el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 [ 48.939105] el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 [ 48.939164] el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 [ 48.939215] __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 [ 48.939274] el1_interrupt+0x28/0x60 [ 48.939327] el1h_64_irq_handler+0x18/0x28 [ 48.939385] el1h_64_irq+0x64/0x68 [ 48.939434] __asan_load8+0x54/0xa8 [ 48.939500] __ftrace_set_clr_event_nolock+0x6c/0x198 [ 48.939563] __ftrace_set_clr_event+0x58/0x80 [ 48.939618] system_enable_write+0x144/0x178 [ 48.939673] vfs_write+0x174/0x738 [ 48.939734] ksys_write+0xd0/0x188 [ 48.939791] __arm64_sys_write+0x4c/0x60 [ 48.939851] invoke_syscall+0x64/0x180 [ 48.939921] el0_svc_common.constprop.0+0x84/0x160 [ 48.939996] do_el0_svc+0x48/0xf8 [ 48.940062] el0_svc+0x34/0xd0 [ 48.940114] el0t_64_sync_handler+0xb8/0xc0 [ 48.940173] el0t_64_sync+0x18c/0x190 [ 48.940872] SMP: stopping secondary CPUs [ 48.942844] Kernel Offset: 0x2d9499c00000 from 0xffff800008000000 [ 48.942938] PHYS_OFFSET: 0xffffaa9840000000 [ 48.942999] CPU features: 0x00000,00d00080,0000421b [ 48.943387] Memory Limit: none > > Thoughts? Sorry, I have no more idea :-( > > Thanx, Paul > >> [1] >> Insufficient stack space to handle exception! >> Insufficient stack space to handle exception! >> [...] >> Kernel panic - not syncing: kernel stack overflow >> CPU: 3 PID: 34 Comm: migration/3 Not tainted >> 6.1.0-rc5-00884-g84368d882b96 #2 >> Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT) >> Stopper: multi_cpu_stop+0x0/0x228 <- __stop_cpus.constprop.0+0xa4/0x100 >> Call trace: >> dump_backtrace+0xf8/0x108 >> show_stack+0x20/0x48 >> dump_stack_lvl+0x68/0x84 >> dump_stack+0x1c/0x38 >> panic+0x214/0x404 >> add_taint+0x0/0xf0 >> panic_bad_stack+0x144/0x160 >> handle_bad_stack+0x38/0x58 >> __bad_stack+0x78/0x7c >> el1h_64_sync_handler+0x4/0xe8 >> __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 >> arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 >> el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 >> el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 >> el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 >> __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 >> arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 >> el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 >> el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 >> el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 >> __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 >> arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 >> el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 >> el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 >> el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 >> __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 >> arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 >> el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 >> el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 >> el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 >> __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 >> arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 >> el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 >> el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 >> el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 >> __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 >> [...] >> >> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org >> Fixes: aaf2bc50df1f ("rcu: Abstract out rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() from rcu_nmi_enter()") >> Signed-off-by: Zheng Yejian <zhengyejian1@huawei.com> >> --- >> kernel/rcu/tree.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c >> index 93416afebd59..68230f02cfb7 100644 >> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c >> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c >> @@ -631,7 +631,7 @@ void rcu_irq_exit_check_preempt(void) >> * controlled environments, this function allows RCU to get what it >> * needs without creating otherwise useless interruptions. >> */ >> -void __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(void) >> +noinstr void __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(void) >> { >> struct rcu_data *rdp = this_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data); >> >> -- >> 2.25.1 >> -- Best regards, Zheng Yejian ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] rcu: Fix kernel stack overflow caused by kprobe on rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() 2022-12-02 9:54 ` Zheng Yejian @ 2022-12-02 19:24 ` Paul E. McKenney 2022-12-05 15:35 ` Frederic Weisbecker 1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Paul E. McKenney @ 2022-12-02 19:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Zheng Yejian Cc: frederic, quic_neeraju, josh, rostedt, mathieu.desnoyers, jiangshanlai, joel, rcu, linux-kernel On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 05:54:48PM +0800, Zheng Yejian wrote: > > > On 2022/11/22 03:57, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 12:00:49PM +0800, Zheng Yejian wrote: > > > Register kprobe on __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() can cause kernel stack > > > overflow [1]. This issue is first found in v5.10 and can be reproduced > > > by enabling CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL and doing like: > > > # cd /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/ > > > # echo 'p:mp1 __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick' >> kprobe_events > > > # echo 1 > events/kprobes/enable > > > > > > So __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() should not be kprobed, mark it as noinstr. > > > > Good catch! > > > > I am inclined to queue this, but noticed that one of its callers need > > it to be noinstr but that the others do not. > > > > Need noinstr: > > > > o enter_from_kernel_mode() -> __enter_from_kernel_mode() -> > > rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() -> __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() > > > > Doesn't need noinstr: > > > > o ct_nmi_enter() -> rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() -> > > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(), courtesy of the call to > > instrumentation_begin() in ct_nmi_enter() that precedes the call > > to rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(). > > > > o irqentry_enter() -> rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() -> > > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(), courtesy of the call to > > instrumentation_begin() in irqentry_enter() that precedes the > > call to rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(). > > > > Is tagging __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() with noinstr as > > proposed in this patch the right thing to do, or should there > > be calls to instrumentation_begin() and instrumentation_end() in > > enter_from_kernel_mode()? Or something else entirely? > > I have tried the calls to instrumentation_{begin,end}() in > enter_from_kernel_mode(), see [1]. But this problem can still be > reproduced, maybe more complete calltrace info [2] is needed for > analyzing. > > Did I add the instrumentation_{begin,end}() in wrong place or is there other > caller need noinstr? It looks OK to me, but that isn't saying much. So I must defer to people knowing more about noinstr than do I. Thanx, Paul > [1] > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c > b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c > index 27369fa1c032..deed5a0941d3 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c > @@ -49,7 +49,9 @@ static __always_inline void > __enter_from_kernel_mode(struct pt_regs *regs) > } > > lockdep_hardirqs_off(CALLER_ADDR0); > + instrumentation_begin(); > rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(); > + instrumentation_end(); > trace_hardirqs_off_finish(); > } > > > [2] > [ 48.921197] Call trace: > [ 48.921241] dump_backtrace+0xf8/0x108 > [ 48.921358] show_stack+0x20/0x48 > [ 48.921418] dump_stack_lvl+0x68/0x84 > [ 48.921477] dump_stack+0x1c/0x38 > [ 48.921530] panic+0x214/0x404 > [ 48.921598] add_taint+0x0/0xf0 > [ 48.921657] panic_bad_stack+0x144/0x160 > [ 48.921715] handle_bad_stack+0x38/0x58 > [ 48.921774] __bad_stack+0x78/0x7c > [ 48.921825] __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > [ 48.921886] arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > [ 48.921949] el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > [ 48.922001] el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > [ 48.922061] el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > [ 48.922112] __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > [...] > [ 48.938382] __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > [ 48.938441] arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > [ 48.938500] el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > [ 48.938549] el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > [ 48.938607] el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > [ 48.938656] __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > [ 48.938715] arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > [ 48.938778] el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > [ 48.938829] el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > [ 48.938887] el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > [ 48.938936] __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > [ 48.938995] arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > [ 48.939054] el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > [ 48.939105] el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > [ 48.939164] el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > [ 48.939215] __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > [ 48.939274] el1_interrupt+0x28/0x60 > [ 48.939327] el1h_64_irq_handler+0x18/0x28 > [ 48.939385] el1h_64_irq+0x64/0x68 > [ 48.939434] __asan_load8+0x54/0xa8 > [ 48.939500] __ftrace_set_clr_event_nolock+0x6c/0x198 > [ 48.939563] __ftrace_set_clr_event+0x58/0x80 > [ 48.939618] system_enable_write+0x144/0x178 > [ 48.939673] vfs_write+0x174/0x738 > [ 48.939734] ksys_write+0xd0/0x188 > [ 48.939791] __arm64_sys_write+0x4c/0x60 > [ 48.939851] invoke_syscall+0x64/0x180 > [ 48.939921] el0_svc_common.constprop.0+0x84/0x160 > [ 48.939996] do_el0_svc+0x48/0xf8 > [ 48.940062] el0_svc+0x34/0xd0 > [ 48.940114] el0t_64_sync_handler+0xb8/0xc0 > [ 48.940173] el0t_64_sync+0x18c/0x190 > [ 48.940872] SMP: stopping secondary CPUs > [ 48.942844] Kernel Offset: 0x2d9499c00000 from 0xffff800008000000 > [ 48.942938] PHYS_OFFSET: 0xffffaa9840000000 > [ 48.942999] CPU features: 0x00000,00d00080,0000421b > [ 48.943387] Memory Limit: none > > > > > > Thoughts? > > Sorry, I have no more idea :-( > > > > > Thanx, Paul > > > > > [1] > > > Insufficient stack space to handle exception! > > > Insufficient stack space to handle exception! > > > [...] > > > Kernel panic - not syncing: kernel stack overflow > > > CPU: 3 PID: 34 Comm: migration/3 Not tainted > > > 6.1.0-rc5-00884-g84368d882b96 #2 > > > Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT) > > > Stopper: multi_cpu_stop+0x0/0x228 <- __stop_cpus.constprop.0+0xa4/0x100 > > > Call trace: > > > dump_backtrace+0xf8/0x108 > > > show_stack+0x20/0x48 > > > dump_stack_lvl+0x68/0x84 > > > dump_stack+0x1c/0x38 > > > panic+0x214/0x404 > > > add_taint+0x0/0xf0 > > > panic_bad_stack+0x144/0x160 > > > handle_bad_stack+0x38/0x58 > > > __bad_stack+0x78/0x7c > > > el1h_64_sync_handler+0x4/0xe8 > > > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > > > arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > > > el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > > > el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > > > el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > > > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > > > arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > > > el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > > > el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > > > el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > > > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > > > arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > > > el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > > > el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > > > el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > > > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > > > arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > > > el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > > > el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > > > el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > > > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > > > arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > > > el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > > > el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > > > el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > > > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > > > [...] > > > > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > > Fixes: aaf2bc50df1f ("rcu: Abstract out rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() from rcu_nmi_enter()") > > > Signed-off-by: Zheng Yejian <zhengyejian1@huawei.com> > > > --- > > > kernel/rcu/tree.c | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c > > > index 93416afebd59..68230f02cfb7 100644 > > > --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c > > > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c > > > @@ -631,7 +631,7 @@ void rcu_irq_exit_check_preempt(void) > > > * controlled environments, this function allows RCU to get what it > > > * needs without creating otherwise useless interruptions. > > > */ > > > -void __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(void) > > > +noinstr void __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(void) > > > { > > > struct rcu_data *rdp = this_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data); > > > -- > > > 2.25.1 > > > > -- > Best regards, > Zheng Yejian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] rcu: Fix kernel stack overflow caused by kprobe on rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() 2022-12-02 9:54 ` Zheng Yejian 2022-12-02 19:24 ` Paul E. McKenney @ 2022-12-05 15:35 ` Frederic Weisbecker 1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Frederic Weisbecker @ 2022-12-05 15:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Zheng Yejian Cc: paulmck, quic_neeraju, josh, rostedt, mathieu.desnoyers, jiangshanlai, joel, rcu, linux-kernel, Peter Zijlstra On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 05:54:48PM +0800, Zheng Yejian wrote: > > > On 2022/11/22 03:57, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 12:00:49PM +0800, Zheng Yejian wrote: > > > Register kprobe on __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() can cause kernel stack > > > overflow [1]. This issue is first found in v5.10 and can be reproduced > > > by enabling CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL and doing like: > > > # cd /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/ > > > # echo 'p:mp1 __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick' >> kprobe_events > > > # echo 1 > events/kprobes/enable > > > > > > So __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() should not be kprobed, mark it as noinstr. > > > > Good catch! > > > > I am inclined to queue this, but noticed that one of its callers need > > it to be noinstr but that the others do not. > > > > Need noinstr: > > > > o enter_from_kernel_mode() -> __enter_from_kernel_mode() -> > > rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() -> __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() > > > > Doesn't need noinstr: > > > > o ct_nmi_enter() -> rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() -> > > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(), courtesy of the call to > > instrumentation_begin() in ct_nmi_enter() that precedes the call > > to rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(). > > > > o irqentry_enter() -> rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() -> > > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(), courtesy of the call to > > instrumentation_begin() in irqentry_enter() that precedes the > > call to rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(). > > > > Is tagging __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() with noinstr as > > proposed in this patch the right thing to do, or should there > > be calls to instrumentation_begin() and instrumentation_end() in > > enter_from_kernel_mode()? Or something else entirely? > > I have tried the calls to instrumentation_{begin,end}() in > enter_from_kernel_mode(), see [1]. But this problem can still be > reproduced, maybe more complete calltrace info [2] is needed for > analyzing. > > Did I add the instrumentation_{begin,end}() in wrong place or is there other > caller need noinstr? > > [1] > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c > b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c > index 27369fa1c032..deed5a0941d3 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c > @@ -49,7 +49,9 @@ static __always_inline void > __enter_from_kernel_mode(struct pt_regs *regs) > } > > lockdep_hardirqs_off(CALLER_ADDR0); > + instrumentation_begin(); > rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(); > + instrumentation_end(); > trace_hardirqs_off_finish(); > } > > > [2] > [ 48.921197] Call trace: > [ 48.921241] dump_backtrace+0xf8/0x108 > [ 48.921358] show_stack+0x20/0x48 > [ 48.921418] dump_stack_lvl+0x68/0x84 > [ 48.921477] dump_stack+0x1c/0x38 > [ 48.921530] panic+0x214/0x404 > [ 48.921598] add_taint+0x0/0xf0 > [ 48.921657] panic_bad_stack+0x144/0x160 > [ 48.921715] handle_bad_stack+0x38/0x58 > [ 48.921774] __bad_stack+0x78/0x7c > [ 48.921825] __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > [ 48.921886] arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > [ 48.921949] el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > [ 48.922001] el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > [ 48.922061] el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > [ 48.922112] __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > [...] > [ 48.938382] __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > [ 48.938441] arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > [ 48.938500] el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > [ 48.938549] el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > [ 48.938607] el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > [ 48.938656] __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > [ 48.938715] arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > [ 48.938778] el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > [ 48.938829] el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > [ 48.938887] el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > [ 48.938936] __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > [ 48.938995] arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > [ 48.939054] el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > [ 48.939105] el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > [ 48.939164] el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > [ 48.939215] __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 Well, that looks strange. If that is called under instrumentation_begin()... +Cc: Peter in case he has an idea. Thanks. > [ 48.939274] el1_interrupt+0x28/0x60 > [ 48.939327] el1h_64_irq_handler+0x18/0x28 > [ 48.939385] el1h_64_irq+0x64/0x68 > [ 48.939434] __asan_load8+0x54/0xa8 > [ 48.939500] __ftrace_set_clr_event_nolock+0x6c/0x198 > [ 48.939563] __ftrace_set_clr_event+0x58/0x80 > [ 48.939618] system_enable_write+0x144/0x178 > [ 48.939673] vfs_write+0x174/0x738 > [ 48.939734] ksys_write+0xd0/0x188 > [ 48.939791] __arm64_sys_write+0x4c/0x60 > [ 48.939851] invoke_syscall+0x64/0x180 > [ 48.939921] el0_svc_common.constprop.0+0x84/0x160 > [ 48.939996] do_el0_svc+0x48/0xf8 > [ 48.940062] el0_svc+0x34/0xd0 > [ 48.940114] el0t_64_sync_handler+0xb8/0xc0 > [ 48.940173] el0t_64_sync+0x18c/0x190 > [ 48.940872] SMP: stopping secondary CPUs > [ 48.942844] Kernel Offset: 0x2d9499c00000 from 0xffff800008000000 > [ 48.942938] PHYS_OFFSET: 0xffffaa9840000000 > [ 48.942999] CPU features: 0x00000,00d00080,0000421b > [ 48.943387] Memory Limit: none > > > > > > Thoughts? > > Sorry, I have no more idea :-( > > > > > Thanx, Paul > > > > > [1] > > > Insufficient stack space to handle exception! > > > Insufficient stack space to handle exception! > > > [...] > > > Kernel panic - not syncing: kernel stack overflow > > > CPU: 3 PID: 34 Comm: migration/3 Not tainted > > > 6.1.0-rc5-00884-g84368d882b96 #2 > > > Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT) > > > Stopper: multi_cpu_stop+0x0/0x228 <- __stop_cpus.constprop.0+0xa4/0x100 > > > Call trace: > > > dump_backtrace+0xf8/0x108 > > > show_stack+0x20/0x48 > > > dump_stack_lvl+0x68/0x84 > > > dump_stack+0x1c/0x38 > > > panic+0x214/0x404 > > > add_taint+0x0/0xf0 > > > panic_bad_stack+0x144/0x160 > > > handle_bad_stack+0x38/0x58 > > > __bad_stack+0x78/0x7c > > > el1h_64_sync_handler+0x4/0xe8 > > > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > > > arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > > > el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > > > el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > > > el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > > > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > > > arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > > > el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > > > el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > > > el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > > > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > > > arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > > > el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > > > el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > > > el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > > > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > > > arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > > > el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > > > el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > > > el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > > > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > > > arm64_enter_el1_dbg.isra.0+0x14/0x20 > > > el1_dbg+0x2c/0x90 > > > el1h_64_sync_handler+0xcc/0xe8 > > > el1h_64_sync+0x64/0x68 > > > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick+0x0/0x1b8 > > > [...] > > > > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > > Fixes: aaf2bc50df1f ("rcu: Abstract out rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() from rcu_nmi_enter()") > > > Signed-off-by: Zheng Yejian <zhengyejian1@huawei.com> > > > --- > > > kernel/rcu/tree.c | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c > > > index 93416afebd59..68230f02cfb7 100644 > > > --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c > > > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c > > > @@ -631,7 +631,7 @@ void rcu_irq_exit_check_preempt(void) > > > * controlled environments, this function allows RCU to get what it > > > * needs without creating otherwise useless interruptions. > > > */ > > > -void __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(void) > > > +noinstr void __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(void) > > > { > > > struct rcu_data *rdp = this_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data); > > > -- > > > 2.25.1 > > > > -- > Best regards, > Zheng Yejian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] rcu: Fix kernel stack overflow caused by kprobe on rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() 2022-11-21 19:57 ` Paul E. McKenney 2022-12-02 9:54 ` Zheng Yejian @ 2022-12-05 13:23 ` Frederic Weisbecker 2022-12-29 12:27 ` Zheng Yejian 1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Frederic Weisbecker @ 2022-12-05 13:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul E. McKenney Cc: Zheng Yejian, quic_neeraju, josh, rostedt, mathieu.desnoyers, jiangshanlai, joel, rcu, linux-kernel On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 11:57:03AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 12:00:49PM +0800, Zheng Yejian wrote: > > Register kprobe on __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() can cause kernel stack > > overflow [1]. This issue is first found in v5.10 and can be reproduced > > by enabling CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL and doing like: > > # cd /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/ > > # echo 'p:mp1 __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick' >> kprobe_events > > # echo 1 > events/kprobes/enable > > > > So __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() should not be kprobed, mark it as noinstr. > > Good catch! > > I am inclined to queue this, but noticed that one of its callers need > it to be noinstr but that the others do not. > > Need noinstr: > > o enter_from_kernel_mode() -> __enter_from_kernel_mode() -> > rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() -> __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() > > Doesn't need noinstr: > > o ct_nmi_enter() -> rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() -> > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(), courtesy of the call to > instrumentation_begin() in ct_nmi_enter() that precedes the call > to rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(). > > o irqentry_enter() -> rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() -> > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(), courtesy of the call to > instrumentation_begin() in irqentry_enter() that precedes the > call to rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(). > > Is tagging __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() with noinstr as > proposed in this patch the right thing to do, or should there > be calls to instrumentation_begin() and instrumentation_end() in > enter_from_kernel_mode()? Or something else entirely? Tagging as noinstr doesn't look right as there are functions in __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() that can be traced anyway. Also that function has the constraint that it can't be called while RCU is idle so it's up to the caller to call instrumentation_begin()/end(). Thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] rcu: Fix kernel stack overflow caused by kprobe on rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() 2022-12-05 13:23 ` Frederic Weisbecker @ 2022-12-29 12:27 ` Zheng Yejian 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Zheng Yejian @ 2022-12-29 12:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: frederic Cc: jiangshanlai, joel, josh, linux-kernel, mathieu.desnoyers, paulmck, quic_neeraju, rcu, rostedt, zhengyejian1, mhiramat On Mon, 5 Dec 2022 14:23:53 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 11:57:03AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 12:00:49PM +0800, Zheng Yejian wrote: > > > Register kprobe on __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() can cause kernel stack > > > overflow [1]. This issue is first found in v5.10 and can be reproduced > > > by enabling CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL and doing like: > > > # cd /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/ > > > # echo 'p:mp1 __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick' >> kprobe_events > > > # echo 1 > events/kprobes/enable > > > > > > So __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() should not be kprobed, mark it as noinstr. > > > > Good catch! > > > > I am inclined to queue this, but noticed that one of its callers need > > it to be noinstr but that the others do not. > > > > Need noinstr: > > > > o enter_from_kernel_mode() -> __enter_from_kernel_mode() -> > > rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() -> __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() > > > > Doesn't need noinstr: > > > > o ct_nmi_enter() -> rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() -> > > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(), courtesy of the call to > > instrumentation_begin() in ct_nmi_enter() that precedes the call > > to rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(). > > > > o irqentry_enter() -> rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() -> > > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(), courtesy of the call to > > instrumentation_begin() in irqentry_enter() that precedes the > > call to rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(). > > > > Is tagging __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() with noinstr as > > proposed in this patch the right thing to do, or should there > > be calls to instrumentation_begin() and instrumentation_end() in > > enter_from_kernel_mode()? Or something else entirely? > > Tagging as noinstr doesn't look right as there are functions in > __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() that can be traced anyway. Also that > function has the constraint that it can't be called while RCU is idle > so it's up to the caller to call instrumentation_begin()/end(). This problem is due to __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() being kprobe-ed, so how about adding __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() into kprobe blacklist by tagging with NOKPROBE_SYMBOL: diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c index cf34a961821a..41606d3ed083 100644 --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c @@ -659,6 +659,7 @@ void __rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(void) } raw_spin_unlock_rcu_node(rdp->mynode); } +NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(__rcu_irq_enter_check_tick); #endif /* CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL */ +Cc: <mhiramat@kernel.org> -- Best regards, Zheng Yejian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-12-29 12:26 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2022-11-19 4:00 [PATCH] rcu: Fix kernel stack overflow caused by kprobe on rcu_irq_enter_check_tick() Zheng Yejian 2022-11-21 19:57 ` Paul E. McKenney 2022-12-02 9:54 ` Zheng Yejian 2022-12-02 19:24 ` Paul E. McKenney 2022-12-05 15:35 ` Frederic Weisbecker 2022-12-05 13:23 ` Frederic Weisbecker 2022-12-29 12:27 ` Zheng Yejian
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox