Thread (6 messages) 6 messages, 5 authors, 2017-07-31

[PATCH RESEND] arm64: arch_timer: fix the infinite recursion when enable ftrace and erratum workaround

From: Ding Tianhong <hidden>
Date: 2017-07-26 02:43:17
Also in: lkml


On 2017/7/10 19:22, Mark Rutland wrote:
On Sun, Jul 09, 2017 at 04:30:54PM +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote:
quoted
When enable preempt and debug ftrace, and perform the following steps, the
system will hang:
mount -t debugfs nodev /sys/kernel/debug/
cd /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/
echo function_graph > current_tracer

This is because tracing the preempt_disable/enable calls would cause
trace_clock() which would get local timer to go into infinite recursion
when enable the arch timer erratum workaround for some chips, so Prevent
tracing of preempt_disable/enable() in arch_timer_reg_read_stable().

This problem is similar to the fixed by upstream commit 96b3d28bf4
("sched/clock: Prevent tracing recursion in sched_clock_cpu()").
As I mentioned before, the patch itself looks fine to me, but the commit
message is somewhat difficult to read.

Can we please change this to:

  arm64: arch_timer: avoid infinite recursion when ftrace is enabled

  On platforms with an arch timer erratum workaround, it's possible for
  arch_timer_reg_read_stable() to recurse into itself when certain
  tracing options are enabled, leading to stack overflows and related
  problems.
 
  For example, when PREEMPT_TRACER and FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER are
  selected, it's possible to trigger this with:
  
  $ mount -t debugfs nodev /sys/kernel/debug/
  $ echo function_graph > /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/current_tracer

  The problem is that in such cases, preempt_disable() instrumentation
  attempts to acquire a timestamp via trace_clock(), resulting in a call
  back to arch_timer_reg_read_stable(), and hence recursion.

  This patch changes arch_timer_reg_read_stable() to use
  preempt_{disable,enable}_notrace(), which avoids this.

With that commit message:

Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>

Daniel, Thomas, would you be happy to fold that in when picking this? Or
would you prefer that I fix this up and resend?
Hi Danial, Thomas:

It looks didn't merge to the mainline tree yet, should I update the commit and
resend this patch again?

Thanks
Ding
Thanks,
Mark.
quoted
Fixes: 6acc71ccac71 ("arm64: arch_timer: Allows a CPU-specific erratum to only affect a subset of CPUs")
Signed-off-by: Ding Tianhong <redacted>
---
 arch/arm64/include/asm/arch_timer.h | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/arch_timer.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/arch_timer.h
index 74d08e4..67bb7a4 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/arch_timer.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/arch_timer.h
@@ -65,13 +65,13 @@ struct arch_timer_erratum_workaround {
 	u64 _val;							\
 	if (needs_unstable_timer_counter_workaround()) {		\
 		const struct arch_timer_erratum_workaround *wa;		\
-		preempt_disable();					\
+		preempt_disable_notrace();				\
 		wa = __this_cpu_read(timer_unstable_counter_workaround); \
 		if (wa && wa->read_##reg)				\
 			_val = wa->read_##reg();			\
 		else							\
 			_val = read_sysreg(reg);			\
-		preempt_enable();					\
+		preempt_enable_notrace();				\
 	} else {							\
 		_val = read_sysreg(reg);				\
 	}								\
-- 
1.9.0
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help