From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] x86/mce: Avoid infinite loop for copy from user recovery
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 15:57:59 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210119235759.GA9970@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210119105632.GF27433@zn.tnic>
On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 11:56:32AM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 03:23:46PM -0800, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:51:03PM -0800, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > > static void kill_me_now(struct callback_head *ch)
> > > {
> > > + p->mce_count = 0;
> > > force_sig(SIGBUS);
> > > }
> >
> > Brown paper bag time ... I just pasted that line from kill_me_maybe()
> > and I thought I did a re-compile ... but obviously not since it gives
> >
> > error: ‘p’ undeclared (first use in this function)
> >
> > Option a) (just like kill_me_maybe)
> >
> > struct task_struct *p = container_of(cb, struct task_struct, mce_kill_me);
> >
> > Option b) (simpler ... not sure why PeterZ did the container_of thing
> >
> > current->mce_count = 0;
>
> Right, he says it is the canonical way to get it out of callback_head.
> I don't think current will change while the #MC handler runs but we can
> adhere to the design pattern here and do container_of() ...
Ok ... I'll use the canonical way.
But now I've run into a weird issue. I'd run some basic tests with a
dozen machine checks in each of:
1) user access
2) kernel copyin
3) futex (multiple accesses from kernel before task_work())
and it passed my tests before I posted.
But the real validation folks took my patch and found that it has
destabilized cases 1 & 2 (and case 3 also chokes if you repeat a few
more times). System either hangs or panics. Generally before 100
injection/conumption cycles.
Their tests are still just doing one at a time (i.e. complete recovery
of one machine cehck before injecting the next error). So there aren't
any complicated race conditions.
So if you see anything obviously broken, let me know. Otherwise I'll
be poking around at the patch to figure out what is wrong.
-Tony
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-19 23:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-08 22:22 [PATCH 0/2] Fix infinite machine check loop in futex_wait_setup() Tony Luck
2021-01-08 22:22 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86/mce: Avoid infinite loop for copy from user recovery Tony Luck
2021-01-08 22:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] futex, x86/mce: Avoid double machine checks Tony Luck
2021-01-08 22:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-01-08 23:08 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-08 23:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-01-08 23:20 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-11 21:44 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] Fix infinite machine check loop in futex_wait_setup() Tony Luck
2021-01-11 21:44 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] x86/mce: Avoid infinite loop for copy from user recovery Tony Luck
2021-01-11 22:11 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-11 22:20 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-12 17:00 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-12 17:16 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-12 17:21 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-12 18:23 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-12 18:57 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-12 20:52 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-12 22:04 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-13 1:50 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-13 4:15 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-13 10:00 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-13 16:06 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-13 16:19 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-13 16:32 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-13 17:35 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-14 20:22 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-14 21:05 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-11 21:44 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] x86/mce: Add new return value to get_user() for machine check Tony Luck
2021-01-11 21:44 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] futex, x86/mce: Avoid double machine checks Tony Luck
2021-01-14 17:22 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] Fix infinite machine check loop in futex_wait_setup() Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-15 0:38 ` [PATCH v3] x86/mce: Avoid infinite loop for copy from user recovery Tony Luck
2021-01-15 15:27 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-15 19:34 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-15 20:51 ` [PATCH v4] " Luck, Tony
2021-01-15 23:23 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-19 10:56 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-19 23:57 ` Luck, Tony [this message]
2021-01-20 12:18 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-20 17:17 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-21 21:09 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-25 22:55 ` [PATCH v5] " Luck, Tony
2021-01-26 11:03 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-26 22:36 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-28 17:57 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-02-01 18:58 ` Luck, Tony
2021-02-02 11:01 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-02-02 16:04 ` Luck, Tony
2021-02-02 21:06 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-02-02 22:12 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-18 15:39 ` [PATCH v3] " Borislav Petkov
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=20210119235759.GA9970@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com \
--to=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-edac@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=x86@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).