Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S934891Ab3E1REp (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 28 May 2013 13:04:45 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:54608 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S934848Ab3E1REo (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 28 May 2013 13:04:44 -0400
Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 19:00:48 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@maine.edu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@ghostprotocols.net>,
        trinity@vger.kernel.org,
        =?iso-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric?= Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: WARN_ONCE in arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
Message-ID: <20130528170048.GA26906@redhat.com>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1305201206480.29892@vincent-weaver-1.um.maine.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1305201206480.29892@vincent-weaver-1.um.maine.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1926
Lines: 59

Well. I am not familiar with this code, and when I tried to read it
I feel I will be never able to understand it ;)

On 05/20, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
> on 3.10-rc1 with the trinity fuzzer patched to exercise the
> perf_event_open() syscall I am triggering this WARN_ONCE:
>
> [   75.864822] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [   75.864830] WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c:121 arch_install_hw_breakpoint+0x5b/0xcb()
...
> [   75.864916]  [<ffffffff81006fff>] ? arch_install_hw_breakpoint+0x5b/0xcb
> [   75.864919]  [<ffffffff810ab5a1>] ? event_sched_in+0x68/0x11c

I am wondering if we should check attr->pinned before WARN_ONCE...

But it seems that hw_breakpoint.c is buggy anyway.

Suppose that attr.task != NULL and event->cpu = -1.

__reserve_bp_slot() tries to calculate slots.pinned and calls
fetch_bp_busy_slots().

In this case fetch_bp_busy_slots() does

	for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
		...
		nr += task_bp_pinned(cpu, bp, type);

And task_bp_pinned() (in particular) checks cpu == event->cpu,
this will be never true.

IOW, it seems that __reserve_bp_slot(task, cpu => -1) always
succeeds because task_bp_pinned() returns 0 and thus we can
create more than HWP_NUM breakpoints. Much more ;)

As for _create, I guess we probably need something like

--- x/kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c
+++ x/kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c
@@ -156,7 +156,7 @@ fetch_bp_busy_slots(struct bp_busy_slots
 		if (!tsk)
 			nr += max_task_bp_pinned(cpu, type);
 		else
-			nr += task_bp_pinned(cpu, bp, type);
+			nr += task_bp_pinned(-1, bp, type);
 
 		if (nr > slots->pinned)
 			slots->pinned = nr;

But I simply can't understand toggle_bp_task_slot()->task_bp_pinned().

Oleg.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/