From: Fernando Luis Vazquez Cao <fernando@intellilink.co.jp>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, fastboot@lists.osdl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH & RFC] kdump and stack overflows
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 03:00:14 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1133200815.2425.98.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m1lkz8gad7.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>
On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 06:39 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Fernando Luis Vazquez Cao <fernando@intellilink.co.jp> writes:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have observed that kdump's reboot path to the second kernel is not
> > stack overflow safe.
> >
> > On the event of a stack overflow critical data that usually resides at
> > the bottom of the stack is likely to be stomped and, consequently, its
> > use should be avoided.
> >
> > In particular, in the i386 and IA64 architectures the macro
> > smp_processor_id ultimately makes use of the "cpu" member of struct
> > thread_info which resides at the bottom of the stack (see code snips
> > below). x86_64, on the other hand, is not affected by this problem
> > because it benefits from the PDA infrastructure.
>
> I agree this is something that we should handle if we can.
> >
> > To circumvent this problem I suggest implementing
> > "safe_smp_processor_id()" (it already exists on x86_64) for i386 and
> > IA64 and use it as a replacement to smp_processor_id in the reboot path
> > to the dump capture kernel. A possible implementation for i386 is
> > attached below.
> >
> > I would appreciante comments on this.
>
> The patch looks like a good one to express the idea, but it is a
> bad one to push upstream.
>
> safe_smp_processor_id has a printk in it.
Sorry for the vestige of debugging code.
> mm/fault.c has related code that really should go into a separate
> patch.
>
> For crash_nmi_callback I don't feel very comfortable about
> dropping the cpu parameter. I suspect you want to move
> the call safe_smp_process_id to do_nmi (which is current
> calling smp_processor_id). Basically the whole nmi path needs a stack
> overflow audit.
The reason behind dropping the cpu parameter in crash_nmi_callback was
to avoid the use of the much slower safe_smp_processor_id in do_nmi,
what would have an impact on all possible nmi handlers. This is ok with
crash_nmi_callback since it obviously isn't performance critical. But,
reconsidering the problem, one could argue that an nmi handler will
hardly ever be a fast path. I think I will move safe_smp_processor_id to
do_nmi as you suggested (sorry for thinking aloud).
Regarding the stack overflow audit of the nmi path, we have the problem
that both nmi_enter and nmi_exit in do_nmi (see code below) make heavy
use of "current" indirectly (specially through the kernel preemption
code).
fastcall void do_nmi(struct pt_regs * regs, long error_code)
{
int cpu;
nmi_enter();
cpu = smp_processor_id();
#ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
if (!cpu_online(cpu)) {
nmi_exit();
return;
}
#endif
++nmi_count(cpu);
if (!rcu_dereference(nmi_callback)(regs, cpu))
default_do_nmi(regs);
nmi_exit();
}
> I believe we have a separate interrupt stack that
> should help but..
Yes, when using 4K stacks we have a separate interrupt stack that should
help, but I am afraid that crash dumping is about being paranoid.
I will split the previous patch as indicated below appropriately and
resend the parts in subsequent emails.
List of patches:
* safe_smp_processor_id: stack overflow safe implementation of
smp_processor_id
* crash: replace smp_processor_id with safe_smp_processor_id in
arch/i386/kernel/crash.c
* do_nmi: replace smp_processor_id with safe_smp_processor_id
NOTE: this patch is still imcomplete. Once I audit the whole nmi path
I will prepare a new patch complementing this.
* fault: take stack overflows into account in do_page_fault
Regards,
Fernando
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-11-28 18:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-11-28 13:11 Fernando Luis Vazquez Cao
2005-11-28 13:39 ` Eric W. Biederman
2005-11-28 18:00 ` Fernando Luis Vazquez Cao [this message]
2005-11-28 18:29 ` Eric W. Biederman
2005-11-29 13:27 ` [Fastboot] " Vivek Goyal
2005-11-29 16:46 ` Eric W. Biederman
2005-11-29 15:43 ` Fernando Luis Vazquez Cao
2005-11-30 6:09 ` [Fastboot] " Vivek Goyal
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=1133200815.2425.98.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=fernando@intellilink.co.jp \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=fastboot@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®