mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
Cc: "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@linux.ibm.com>,
	Anil S Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Srinivasa D S <srinivasa@in.ibm.com>,
	Hien Nguyen <hien@us.ibm.com>, David Valin <dvalin@redhat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] kprobes: Fix locking in recycle_rp_inst
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 17:38:46 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190227173846.397e2a66da37e0385d3fc383@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190226161036.10680-1-jolsa@kernel.org>

Hi Jiri,

On Tue, 26 Feb 2019 17:10:36 +0100
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> wrote:

> hi,
> David reported a crash related to return kprobes.
> The change below tries to explain it and fix it,
> but I'm sending it as RFC because I don't follow
> kprobes code that much, so I might have missed
> something.

Thank you for the report and patch!

> 
> thanks,
> jirka
> 
> 
> ---
> We can call recycle_rp_inst from both task and irq contexts,
> so we should use irqsave/irqrestore locking functions.
> 
> I wasn't able to hit this particular lockup, but I found it
> while checking on why return probe on _raw_spin_lock locks
> the system, reported by David by using bpftrace on simple
> script, like:
> 
>   kprobe:_raw_spin_lock
>   {
>       @time[tid] = nsecs;
>       @symb[tid] = arg0;
>   }
> 
>   kretprobe:_raw_spin_lock
>       / @time[tid] /
>   {
>       delete(@time[tid]);
>       delete(@symb[tid]);
>   }
> 
> or by perf tool:
> 
>   # perf probe -a _raw_spin_lock:%return
>   # perf record -e probe:_raw_spin_lock__return -a
> 
> The thing is that the _raw_spin_lock call in recycle_rp_inst,
> is the only one that return-probe-code-paths call, and it
> triggers another kprobe instance while already processing one
> and locks up on kretprobe_table_lock lock:
> 
>   #12 [ffff99c337403d28] queued_spin_lock_slowpath at ffffffff9712693b
>   #13 [ffff99c337403d28] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave at ffffffff9794c100
>   #14 [ffff99c337403d38] pre_handler_kretprobe at ffffffff9719435c
>   #15 [ffff99c337403d68] kprobe_ftrace_handler at ffffffff97059f12
>   #16 [ffff99c337403d98] ftrace_ops_assist_func at ffffffff971a0421
>   #17 [ffff99c337403dd8] handle_edge_irq at ffffffff97139f55
>   #18 [ffff99c337403df0] handle_edge_irq at ffffffff97139f55
>   #19 [ffff99c337403e58] _raw_spin_lock at ffffffff9794c111
>   #20 [ffff99c337403e88] _raw_spin_lock at ffffffff9794c115
>   #21 [ffff99c337403ea8] trampoline_handler at ffffffff97058a8f
>   #22 [ffff99c337403f00] kretprobe_trampoline at ffffffff970586d5
>   #23 [ffff99c337403fb0] handle_irq at ffffffff97027b1f
>   #24 [ffff99c337403fc0] do_IRQ at ffffffff97a01bc9
>   --- <IRQ stack> ---
>   #25 [ffffa5c3c1f9fb38] ret_from_intr at ffffffff97a0098f
>       [exception RIP: smp_call_function_many+460]
>       RIP: ffffffff9716685c  RSP: ffffa5c3c1f9fbe0  RFLAGS: 00000202
>       RAX: 0000000000000005  RBX: ffff99c337421c80  RCX: ffff99c337566260
>       RDX: 0000000000000001  RSI: 0000000000000000  RDI: ffff99c337421c88
>       RBP: ffff99c337421c88   R8: 0000000000000001   R9: ffffffff98352940
>       R10: ffff99c33703c910  R11: ffffffff9794c110  R12: ffffffff97055680
>       R13: 0000000000000000  R14: 0000000000000001  R15: 0000000000000040
>       ORIG_RAX: ffffffffffffffde  CS: 0010  SS: 0018
>   #26 [ffffa5c3c1f9fc20] on_each_cpu at ffffffff97166918
>   #27 [ffffa5c3c1f9fc40] ftrace_replace_code at ffffffff97055a34
>   #28 [ffffa5c3c1f9fc88] ftrace_modify_all_code at ffffffff971a3552
>   #29 [ffffa5c3c1f9fca8] arch_ftrace_update_code at ffffffff97055a6c
>   #30 [ffffa5c3c1f9fcb0] ftrace_run_update_code at ffffffff971a3683
>   #31 [ffffa5c3c1f9fcc0] ftrace_startup at ffffffff971a6638
>   #32 [ffffa5c3c1f9fce8] register_ftrace_function at ffffffff971a66a0
> 
> When we switch it to raw_spin_lock_irqsave the return probe
> on _raw_spin_lock starts working.

Yes, there can be a race between probes and probe on irq handler.

kretprobe_hash_lock()/kretprobe_hash_unlock() are safe because
those disables irqs. Only recycle_rp_inst() has this problem.

Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>

And this is one of the oldest bug in kprobe.

commit ef53d9c5e4da ("kprobes: improve kretprobe scalability with hashed locking")

introduced the spin_lock(&rp->lock) in recycle_rp_inst() but forgot to disable irqs.
And 

commit c9becf58d935 ("[PATCH] kretprobe: kretprobe-booster")

introduced assembly-based trampoline which didn't disable irq.

Could you add Cc:stable to this patch too?

Thank you!!

> 
> Reported-by: David Valin <dvalin@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
> ---
>  kernel/kprobes.c | 6 ++++--
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c
> index c83e54727131..c82056b354cc 100644
> --- a/kernel/kprobes.c
> +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c
> @@ -1154,9 +1154,11 @@ void recycle_rp_inst(struct kretprobe_instance *ri,
>  	hlist_del(&ri->hlist);
>  	INIT_HLIST_NODE(&ri->hlist);
>  	if (likely(rp)) {
> -		raw_spin_lock(&rp->lock);
> +		unsigned long flags;
> +
> +		raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&rp->lock, flags);
>  		hlist_add_head(&ri->hlist, &rp->free_instances);
> -		raw_spin_unlock(&rp->lock);
> +		raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rp->lock, flags);
>  	} else
>  		/* Unregistering */
>  		hlist_add_head(&ri->hlist, head);
> -- 
> 2.17.2
> 


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>

  reply	other threads:[~2019-02-27  8:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-02-26 16:10 Jiri Olsa
2019-02-27  8:38 ` Masami Hiramatsu [this message]
2019-02-27 13:33   ` Jiri Olsa
2019-02-28  6:50     ` Masami Hiramatsu
2019-03-01 23:00       ` David Valin

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=20190227173846.397e2a66da37e0385d3fc383@kernel.org \
    --to=mhiramat@kernel.org \
    --cc=anil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dvalin@redhat.com \
    --cc=hien@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=naveen.n.rao@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=srinivasa@in.ibm.com \
    /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

Powered by JetHome