Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753943AbbHZDLf (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 25 Aug 2015 23:11:35 -0400
Received: from mail4.hitachi.co.jp ([133.145.228.5]:34600 "EHLO
	mail4.hitachi.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751816AbbHZDLd (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 25 Aug 2015 23:11:33 -0400
From: =?utf-8?B?5rKz5ZCI6Iux5a6PIC8gS0FXQUnvvIxISURFSElSTw==?= 
	<hidehiro.kawai.ez@hitachi.com>
To: "'Peter Zijlstra'" <peterz@infradead.org>
CC: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
        "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
        "kexec@lists.infradead.org" <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        =?utf-8?B?5bmz5p2+6ZuF5bezIC8gSElSQU1BVFXvvIxNQVNBTUk=?= 
	<masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com>
Subject: RE: [V3 PATCH 3/4] kexec: Fix race between panic() and
 crash_kexec() called directly
Thread-Topic: [V3 PATCH 3/4] kexec: Fix race between panic() and
 crash_kexec() called directly
Thread-Index: AQHQ0AtjXekgeO133USkzCimPcfuqJ4VA1yAgAJdTKCABPPXAIABVqwg
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 03:11:28 +0000
Message-ID: <04EAB7311EE43145B2D3536183D1A84454951595@GSjpTKYDCembx31.service.hitachi.net>
References: <20150806054543.25766.29590.stgit@softrs>
 <20150806054543.25766.5914.stgit@softrs>
 <20150820230845.GF3161@worktop.event.rightround.com>
 <04EAB7311EE43145B2D3536183D1A8445493C868@GSjpTKYDCembx31.service.hitachi.net>
 <20150825145258.GS16853@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
In-Reply-To: <20150825145258.GS16853@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Accept-Language: ja-JP, en-US
Content-Language: ja-JP
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-originating-ip: [10.198.220.63]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by mail.home.local id t7Q3Bfck022646
Content-Length: 2550
Lines: 79

Hi,

> From: Peter Zijlstra [mailto:peterz@infradead.org]
> 
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 02:35:24AM +0000, 河合英宏 / KAWAI，HIDEHIRO wrote:
> > > From: Peter Zijlstra [mailto:peterz@infradead.org]
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 02:45:43PM +0900, Hidehiro Kawai wrote:
> > > >  void crash_kexec(struct pt_regs *regs)
> > > >  {
> > > > +	int old_cpu, this_cpu;
> > > > +
> > > > +	/*
> > > > +	 * `old_cpu == -1' means we are the first comer and crash_kexec()
> > > > +	 * was called without entering panic().
> > > > +	 * `old_cpu == this_cpu' means crash_kexec() was called from panic().
> > > > +	 */
> > > > +	this_cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
> > > > +	old_cpu = atomic_cmpxchg(&panic_cpu, -1, this_cpu);
> > > > +	if (old_cpu != -1 && old_cpu != this_cpu)
> > > > +		return;
> > >
> > > This allows recursive calling of crash_kexec(), the Changelog did not
> > > mention that. Is this really required?
> >
> > What part are you arguing?  Recursive call of crash_kexec() doesn't
> > happen.  In the first place, one of the purpose of this patch is
> > to prevent a recursive call of crash_kexec() in the following case
> > as I stated in the description:
> >
> > CPU 0:
> >   oops_end()
> >     crash_kexec()
> >       mutex_trylock() // acquired
> >         <NMI>
> >         io_check_error()
> >           panic()
> >             crash_kexec()
> >               mutex_trylock() // failed to acquire
> >             infinite loop
> >
> 
> Yes, but what to we want to do there? It seems to me that is wrong, we
> do not want to let a recursive crash_kexec() proceed.
> 
> Whereas the condition you created explicitly allows this recursion by
> virtue of the 'old_cpu != this_cpu' check.

I understand your question.  I don't intend to permit the recursive
call of crash_kexec() as for 'old_cpu != this_cpu' check.  That is
needed for the case of panic() --> crash_kexec().  Since panic_cpu has
already been set to this_cpu in panic() (please see PATCH 1/4), no one
can run crash_kexec() without 'old_cpu != this_cpu' check.

If you don't like this check, I would also be able to handle this case
like below:

crash_kexec()
{
	old_cpu = atomic_cmpxchg(&panic_cpu, -1, this_cpu);
	if (old_cpu != -1)
		return;

	__crash_kexec();
}

panic()
{
	atomic_cmpxchg(&panic_cpu, -1, this_cpu);
	__crash_kexec();
...


Regards,

Hidehiro Kawai
Hitachi, Ltd. Research & Development Group

????{.n?+???????+%?????ݶ??w??{.n?+????{??G?????{ay?ʇڙ?,j??f???h?????????z_??(?階?ݢj"???m??????G????????????&???~???iO???z??v?^?m????????????I?