All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
	Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
	Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>,
	live-patching@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] livepatch/ftrace: Add recursion protection to the ftrace callback
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 14:51:06 +0100 (CET)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.21.2010291443310.1688@pobox.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201028115613.291169246@goodmis.org>

On Wed, 28 Oct 2020, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> From: "Steven Rostedt (VMware)" <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> 
> If a ftrace callback does not supply its own recursion protection and
> does not set the RECURSION_SAFE flag in its ftrace_ops, then ftrace will
> make a helper trampoline to do so before calling the callback instead of
> just calling the callback directly.
> 
> The default for ftrace_ops is going to assume recursion protection unless
> otherwise specified.

Hm, I've always thought that we did not need any kind of recursion 
protection for our callback. It is marked as notrace and it does not call 
anything traceable. In fact, it does not call anything. I even have a note 
in my todo list to mark the callback as RECURSION_SAFE :)

At the same time, it probably does not hurt and the patch is still better 
than what we have now without RECURSION_SAFE if I understand the patch set 
correctly.
 
> Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
> Cc: Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>
> Cc: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>
> Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
> Cc: Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>
> Cc: live-patching@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> ---
>  kernel/livepatch/patch.c | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/livepatch/patch.c b/kernel/livepatch/patch.c
> index b552cf2d85f8..6c0164d24bbd 100644
> --- a/kernel/livepatch/patch.c
> +++ b/kernel/livepatch/patch.c
> @@ -45,9 +45,13 @@ static void notrace klp_ftrace_handler(unsigned long ip,
>  	struct klp_ops *ops;
>  	struct klp_func *func;
>  	int patch_state;
> +	int bit;
>  
>  	ops = container_of(fops, struct klp_ops, fops);
>  
> +	bit = ftrace_test_recursion_trylock();
> +	if (bit < 0)
> +		return;

This means that the original function will be called in case of recursion. 
That's probably fair, but I'm wondering if we should at least WARN about 
it.

Thanks
Miroslav

  reply	other threads:[~2020-10-29 13:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-10-28 11:52 [PATCH 0/9] ftrace: Have callbacks handle their own recursion Steven Rostedt
2020-10-28 11:52 ` [PATCH 1/9] ftrace: Move the recursion testing into global headers Steven Rostedt
2020-10-30  9:13   ` Miroslav Benes
2020-10-30 12:30     ` Steven Rostedt
2020-10-28 11:52 ` [PATCH 2/9] ftrace: Add ftrace_test_recursion_trylock() helper function Steven Rostedt
2020-10-28 11:52 ` [PATCH 3/9] ftrace: Optimize testing what context current is in Steven Rostedt
2020-10-28 11:52 ` [PATCH 4/9] pstore/ftrace: Add recursion protection to the ftrace callback Steven Rostedt
2020-10-28 15:59   ` Kees Cook
2020-10-28 11:52 ` [PATCH 5/9] kprobes/ftrace: " Steven Rostedt
2020-10-28 11:52   ` Steven Rostedt
2020-10-29  7:58   ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-10-29  7:58     ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-10-29 13:40     ` Steven Rostedt
2020-10-29 13:40       ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-02  5:08       ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-11-02  5:08         ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-10-28 11:52 ` [PATCH 6/9] livepatch/ftrace: " Steven Rostedt
2020-10-29 13:51   ` Miroslav Benes [this message]
2020-10-29 14:37     ` Steven Rostedt
2020-10-30 12:28       ` Steven Rostedt
2020-10-29 14:57     ` Petr Mladek
2020-10-29 15:03       ` Miroslav Benes
2020-10-29 18:24       ` Steven Rostedt
2020-10-30  9:48         ` Miroslav Benes
2020-10-30 10:41           ` Petr Mladek
2020-10-28 11:52 ` [PATCH 7/9] perf/ftrace: " Steven Rostedt
2020-10-28 11:52 ` [PATCH 8/9] perf/ftrace: Check for rcu_is_watching() in callback function Steven Rostedt
2020-10-28 11:52 ` [PATCH 9/9] ftrace: Reverse what the RECURSION flag means in the ftrace_ops 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=alpine.LSU.2.21.2010291443310.1688@pobox.suse.cz \
    --to=mbenes@suse.cz \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=jikos@kernel.org \
    --cc=joe.lawrence@redhat.com \
    --cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
    --cc=pmladek@suse.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.