On Wed, 10 Nov 2021 at 20:06, David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote:

> >> "remaining vmcore is zeroed that it is bad and not acceptable for
> kdump."
> >>
> >> Which scenario are you concerned about? User space plays stupid games
> >> (unbining a driver from a virtio-mem device in a *kdump kernel* after
> >> opening /proc/vmcore) and wins stupid prices (a warning and a vmcore
> >> filled (partially) with zeroes). Why isn't a warning sufficient for
> >> something like that?
> >
> > Hi David,
> >
> > Suppose we have the use case below:
> >
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> thanks for elaborating, it helps a lot to understand your concerns.
>
> > A user plays with the game (Probably in hypervisor part, but the user is
> > not aware that the guest panicked and in a kdump kernel), then we get a
> > zeroed vmcore.   But the panic can not be easily reproduced any more,
> > then the warning is not useful.
>
> I can only speak about virtio-mem (well, that's the only current known
> "dynamic vmcore_cb registration" user :) ).
>
> virtio-mem devices cannot get hotunplugged in the hypervisor (i.e.,
> QEMU)-- you can only hot(un)plug device memory, but not the device
> itself, it will stick around. Hotunplugging the device is completely
> blocked and not supported.
>
> The reason is simple: unplugging a virtio-mem device will also remove
> the device memory. It's similar to other memory devices, such as DIMMs
> -- I would not recommend forced, physical removal of a DIMM to anybody
> -- not while the OS is running and not while kdump is saving
> /proc/vmcore. Which is also the reason why hypervisors don't generally
> support forced removal of such devices. :)
>
> So for the currently known vmcore_cb users, hypervisor action cannot
> result in driver unbinding and consequently vmcore_cb changes.
>
> Note: virtio-mem-pci devices might eventually get hotplugged while kdump
> is active. I assume we don't disable PCI hotplug in kdump kernels. While
> this will trigger a warning ("Unexpected vmcore callback registration"),
> the vmcore will not be affected and be complete.
>

Ok, thanks for the details, it sounds safe for the time being then.


>
> >
> > But if you think user is playing the game in kdump kernel, eg. in guest
> > os while kdump is saving vmcore then it is nearly not possible to happen
> > I agree with you it is a very trival problem.
>
> Yes, that's the only thing I consider can happen. For example, doing a:
>
> # echo 1 > /sys/devices/pci0000\:00/0000\:00\:03.0/remove
>
> in a kdump kernel after opening the vmcore.
>
> >
> > Probably we have some misunderstanding, but it would be good to make it
> > clear :)
>
> Understanding your concern, it could be future proof (for future
> vmcore_cb users?) to fail the ioctls instead of returning 0. But even
> for new memory devices, unplug is usually something to be fenced off by
> the hypervisor, just like not allowing forced DIMM removal.
>

Yes,  there could be some future issues, not only for virt users, who
knows...


> The only think I could imagine is having e.g., virtio-balloon device
> register a vmcore_cb dynamically and providing a new mechanism to query
> if a page is backed by a real page in the hypervisor (similar to XENs
> hypercall). Such a device could be unplugged without harm, as it doesn't
> actually provide device memory.
>

> --
> Thanks,
>
> David / dhildenb
>
>