mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] kprobes: Add separate preempt_disabling for kprobes
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 12:46:27 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1309452387.26417.111.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110630161439.GA8508@somewhere>

On Thu, 2011-06-30 at 18:14 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:


> That's a bit sad we need to bloat preempt_schedule() with a new test, especially
> as kprobes should not add overhead in the off case and then I guess many distros
> enable kprobes by default, so it's probably not just enabled on some debug kernel.

A simple per_cpu var test is not that bad, and that's also why I put it
where I did. It only gets checked after all the other locations fail. I
doubt this really adds any measurable overhead. Note, most distro's
don't even enable CONFIG_PREEMPT so this isn't even touched by them.

> 
> Another idea could be to turn current_thread_info()->preempt_count into a local_t
> var which ensures a single incrementation is performed in a single instruction.

Not all archs support such a thing.

> 
> Well, in the hope that every arch can do something like:
> 
> inc (mem_addr)
> 
> IIRC, I believe arm can't... And the default local_inc is probably not helpful
> in our case...

Some archs (I believe) perform local_inc() slower than i++. In which
case, this solution will more likely slow things down even more than
what I proposed. As the impact will be on every preempt_disable and
enable.

And this would not even help for the place that I actually hit the crash
on. Which was in the scheduler. It wasn't the addition of the
preempt_count that caused my crash, it was just reading it.

	if (unlikely(in_atomic_preempt_off() && !prev->exit_state))
		__schedule_bug(prev);

The in_atomic_preempt_off() is what blew up on me.

#define in_atomic_preempt_off() \
		((preempt_count() & ~PREEMPT_ACTIVE) != PREEMPT_CHECK_OFFSET)

What happened was that the reading of preempt_count was single stepped.
And that had preempt_count set to one more due to the preempt_disable()
in kprobes. Even if preempt_count was a local_t, this bug would have
still triggered, and my system would have crashed anyway. (every
schedule caused a printk to happen).


-- Steve



  reply	other threads:[~2011-06-30 16:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-06-30 13:23 [BUG] kprobes crashing because of preempt count Steven Rostedt
2011-06-30 15:51 ` [RFC][PATCH] kprobes: Add separate preempt_disabling for kprobes Steven Rostedt
2011-06-30 16:14   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-06-30 16:46     ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2011-06-30 19:40   ` Jason Baron
2011-06-30 19:42     ` Steven Rostedt
2011-06-30 21:56   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-07-01  1:22     ` Masami Hiramatsu
2011-07-01  1:38       ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-01  1:52         ` Masami Hiramatsu
2011-07-01  5:09   ` Masami Hiramatsu
2011-07-01 11:13     ` Masami Hiramatsu
2011-07-01 12:54       ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-01 12:19     ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-01 13:15       ` Masami Hiramatsu
2011-07-01 13:14         ` [RFC PATCH -tip ] [BUGFIX] x86: Remove preempt disabling from kprobes Masami Hiramatsu
2011-07-01 13:43           ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-01 13:53             ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-03  2:05               ` Masami Hiramatsu
2011-07-02  6:09           ` Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
2011-07-01  1:12 ` [BUG] kprobes crashing because of preempt count Masami Hiramatsu
2011-07-01  1:33   ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-01  2:23     ` Masami Hiramatsu
2011-07-01 11:36   ` Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
2011-07-01 12:01     ` Masami Hiramatsu
2011-07-01 13:03       ` Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
2011-07-01 13:19         ` Steven Rostedt

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=1309452387.26417.111.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com \
    --to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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®