Re: [PATCH 11/11 v2] ftrace: Add recording of functions that caused recursion

From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Anton Vorontsov <anton@enomsg.org>,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
	Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
	Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	live-patching@vger.kernel.org, Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>,
	Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-csky@vger.kernel.org,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
	Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
	Colin Cross <ccross@android.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/11 v2] ftrace: Add recording of functions that caused recursion
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 11:40:49 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201103104049.GN20201@alley> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201102120907.457ad2f7@gandalf.local.home>

On Mon 2020-11-02 12:09:07, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 17:41:47 +0100
> Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri 2020-10-30 17:31:53, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > From: "Steven Rostedt (VMware)" <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> > > 
> > > This adds CONFIG_FTRACE_RECORD_RECURSION that will record to a file
> > > "recursed_functions" all the functions that caused recursion while a
> > > callback to the function tracer was running.
> > >   
> > 
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_recursion_record.c
> > > +	if (index >= CONFIG_FTRACE_RECORD_RECURSION_SIZE)
> > > +		return;
> > > +
> > > +	for (i = index - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
> > > +		if (recursed_functions[i].ip == ip) {
> > > +			cached_function = ip;
> > > +			return;
> > > +		}
> > > +	}
> > > +
> > > +	cached_function = ip;
> > > +
> > > +	/*
> > > +	 * We only want to add a function if it hasn't been added before.
> > > +	 * Add to the current location before incrementing the count.
> > > +	 * If it fails to add, then increment the index (save in i)
> > > +	 * and try again.
> > > +	 */
> > > +	old = cmpxchg(&recursed_functions[index].ip, 0, ip);
> > > +	if (old != 0) {
> > > +		/* Did something else already added this for us? */
> > > +		if (old == ip)
> > > +			return;
> > > +		/* Try the next location (use i for the next index) */
> > > +		i = index + 1;  
> > 
> > What about
> > 
> > 		index++;
> > 
> > We basically want to run the code again with index + 1 limit.
> 
> But something else could update nr_records, and we want to use that if
> nr_records is greater than i.
> 
> Now, we could swap the use case, and have
> 
> 	int index = 0;
> 
> 	[..]
> 	i = atomic_read(&nr_records);
> 	if (i > index)
> 		index = i;
> 
> 	[..]
> 
> 		index++;
> 		goto again;
> 
> 
> > 
> > Maybe, it even does not make sense to check the array again
> > and we should just try to store the value into the next slot.
> 
> We do this dance to prevent duplicates.

I see.

My code was wrong. It reserved slot for the new "ip" by cmpxchg
on nr_records. The "ip" was stored later so that any parallel
call need not see that it is a dumplicate.

Your code reserves the slot by cmpxchg of "ip".
Any parallel call would fail to take the slot and see
the "ip" in the next iteration.

Best Regards,
Petr