Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6C72C433FE for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2021 17:39:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S243591AbhLFRme (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Dec 2021 12:42:34 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36264 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S243543AbhLFRmc (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Dec 2021 12:42:32 -0500 Received: from sin.source.kernel.org (sin.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:40e1:4800::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4ECFFC061746; Mon, 6 Dec 2021 09:39:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sin.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 447E6CE173F; Mon, 6 Dec 2021 17:39:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 688CDC341C1; Mon, 6 Dec 2021 17:38:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1638812339; bh=viapyMP+uWweUhUtSebtUlHGJOGRA2C6UPmzpvE8xJY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Reply-To:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=exsO6t4pmiT/cTp0u+pjPqE2UN77Jro5Fa9COX2N1ZWb5cLUIQHyaonWb2YHaUkQu 1bA2XzSw4H1B1VxZOurxRqwc5+4KTsDs5LQtkUNMcPGgn2FMA3JAVInXRk5uKCLRPo rRTiujw8hJbNGZATgGz+kXFphXeIMwwKypjMNl1T8kt+Xk7BNPl0b/9Mu4bCipNW9k Lj1kjG4FUPLlyI7APSFAJws73AxTJso7IojAvMwkNIDbvDReClUBa7lMXW1HOCDLlk vQzpGwcEfOnxmpktFdHzdfyqkXnd6zS6316nAt3u64ct23hVJHO6HUSbz4FsjJIsk8 2Mz4O9w4n3ICQ== Received: by paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0AB175C1461; Mon, 6 Dec 2021 09:38:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2021 09:38:59 -0800 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Boqun Feng Cc: Marco Elver , Alexander Potapenko , Borislav Petkov , Dmitry Vyukov , Ingo Molnar , Mark Rutland , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Waiman Long , Will Deacon , kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev, x86@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 08/25] kcsan: Show location access was reordered to Message-ID: <20211206173859.GA641268@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1> Reply-To: paulmck@kernel.org References: <20211130114433.2580590-1-elver@google.com> <20211130114433.2580590-9-elver@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 01:16:25AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 05:04:20PM +0100, Marco Elver wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 10:31PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > > [...] > > > Thanks for the explanation, I was missing the swap here. However... > > > > > > > So in your above example you need to swap "reordered to" and the top > > > > frame of the stack trace. > > > > > > > > Apologies, I wasn't entirely precise ... what you say below is correct. > > > > > IIUC, the report for my above example will be: > > > > > > | write (reordered) to 0xaaaa of ...: > > > | foo+0x... // address of the write to A > > > | ... > > > | | > > > | +-> reordered to: foo+0x... // address of the callsite to bar() in foo() > > > > > > , right? Because in replace_stack_entry(), it's not the top frame where > > > the race occurred that gets swapped, it's the frame which belongs to the > > > same function as the original access that gets swapped. In other words, > > > when KCSAN finds the problem, top entries of the calling stack are: > > > > > > [0] bar+0x.. // address of the write to B > > > [1] foo+0x.. // address of the callsite to bar() in foo() > > > > > > after replace_stack_entry(), they changes to: > > > > > > [0] bar+0x.. // address of the write to B > > > skip ->[1] foo+0x.. // address of the write to A > > > > > > , as a result the report won't mention bar() at all. > > > > Correct. > > > > > And I think a better report will be: > > > > > > | write (reordered) to 0xaaaa of ...: > > > | foo+0x... // address of the write to A > > > | ... > > > | | > > > | +-> reordered to: bar+0x... // address of the write to B in bar() > > > > > > because it tells users the exact place the accesses get reordered. That > > > means maybe we want something as below? Not completely tested, but I > > > play with scope checking a bit, seems it gives what I want. Thoughts? > > > > This is problematic because it makes it much harder to actually figure > > out what's going on, given "reordered to" isn't a full stack trace. So > > if you're deep in some call hierarchy, seeing a random "reordered to" > > line is quite useless. What I want to see, at the very least, is the ip > > to the same function where the original access happened. > > > > We could of course try and generate a full stack trace at "reordered > > to", but this would entail > > > > a) allocating 2x unsigned long[64] on the stack (or moving to > > static storage), > > b) further increasing the report length, > > c) an even larger number of possibly distinct reports for the > > same issue; this makes deduplication even harder. > > > > The reason I couldn't justify all that is that when I looked through > > several dozen "reordered to" reports, I never found anything other than > > the ip in the function frame of the original access useful. That, and in > > most cases the "reordered to" location was in the same function or in an > > inlined function. > > > > The below patch would do what you'd want I think. > > > > My opinion is to err on the side of simplicity until there is evidence > > we need it. Of course, if you have a compelling reason that we need it > > from the beginning, happy to send it as a separate patch on top. > > > > What do you think? > > > > Totally agreed. It's better to keep it simple until people report that > they want to see more information to resolve the issues. And thanks for > looking into the "double stack traces", that looks good to me too. > > For the original patch, feel free to add: > > Reviewed-by: Boqun Feng Thank you both! I will add Boqun's Reviewed-by on the next rebase. Thanx, Paul > Regards, > Boqun > > > Thanks, > > -- Marco > > > > ------ >8 ------ > > > > From: Marco Elver > > Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2021 16:35:02 +0100 > > Subject: [PATCH] kcsan: Show full stack trace of reordered-to accesses > > > > Change reports involving reordered accesses to show the full stack trace > > of "reordered to" accesses. For example: > > > > | ================================================================== > > | BUG: KCSAN: data-race in test_kernel_wrong_memorder / test_kernel_wrong_memorder > > | > > | read-write to 0xffffffffc02d01e8 of 8 bytes by task 2481 on cpu 2: > > | test_kernel_wrong_memorder+0x57/0x90 > > | access_thread+0xb7/0x100 > > | kthread+0x2ed/0x320 > > | ret_from_fork+0x22/0x30 > > | > > | read-write (reordered) to 0xffffffffc02d01e8 of 8 bytes by task 2480 on cpu 0: > > | test_kernel_wrong_memorder+0x57/0x90 > > | access_thread+0xb7/0x100 > > | kthread+0x2ed/0x320 > > | ret_from_fork+0x22/0x30 > > | | > > | +-> reordered to: test_delay+0x31/0x110 > > | test_kernel_wrong_memorder+0x80/0x90 > > | > > | Reported by Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer on: > > | CPU: 0 PID: 2480 Comm: access_thread Not tainted 5.16.0-rc1+ #2 > > | Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.14.0-2 04/01/2014 > > | ================================================================== > > > > Signed-off-by: Marco Elver > > --- > > kernel/kcsan/report.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > > 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/kernel/kcsan/report.c b/kernel/kcsan/report.c > > index 67794404042a..a8317d5f5123 100644 > > --- a/kernel/kcsan/report.c > > +++ b/kernel/kcsan/report.c > > @@ -317,22 +317,29 @@ replace_stack_entry(unsigned long stack_entries[], int num_entries, unsigned lon > > { > > unsigned long symbolsize, offset; > > unsigned long target_func; > > - int skip; > > + int skip, i; > > > > if (kallsyms_lookup_size_offset(ip, &symbolsize, &offset)) > > target_func = ip - offset; > > else > > goto fallback; > > > > - for (skip = 0; skip < num_entries; ++skip) { > > + skip = get_stack_skipnr(stack_entries, num_entries); > > + for (i = 0; skip < num_entries; ++skip, ++i) { > > unsigned long func = stack_entries[skip]; > > > > if (!kallsyms_lookup_size_offset(func, &symbolsize, &offset)) > > goto fallback; > > func -= offset; > > > > + replaced[i] = stack_entries[skip]; > > if (func == target_func) { > > - *replaced = stack_entries[skip]; > > + /* > > + * There must be at least 1 entry left in the original > > + * @stack_entries, so we know that we will never occupy > > + * more than @num_entries - 1 of @replaced. > > + */ > > + replaced[i + 1] = 0; > > stack_entries[skip] = ip; > > return skip; > > } > > @@ -341,6 +348,7 @@ replace_stack_entry(unsigned long stack_entries[], int num_entries, unsigned lon > > fallback: > > /* Should not happen; the resulting stack trace is likely misleading. */ > > WARN_ONCE(1, "Cannot find frame for %pS in stack trace", (void *)ip); > > + replaced[0] = 0; > > return get_stack_skipnr(stack_entries, num_entries); > > } > > > > @@ -365,11 +373,16 @@ static int sym_strcmp(void *addr1, void *addr2) > > } > > > > static void > > -print_stack_trace(unsigned long stack_entries[], int num_entries, unsigned long reordered_to) > > +print_stack_trace(unsigned long stack_entries[], int num_entries, unsigned long *reordered_to) > > { > > stack_trace_print(stack_entries, num_entries, 0); > > - if (reordered_to) > > - pr_err(" |\n +-> reordered to: %pS\n", (void *)reordered_to); > > + if (reordered_to[0]) { > > + int i; > > + > > + pr_err(" |\n +-> reordered to: %pS\n", (void *)reordered_to[0]); > > + for (i = 1; i < NUM_STACK_ENTRIES && reordered_to[i]; ++i) > > + pr_err(" %pS\n", (void *)reordered_to[i]); > > + } > > } > > > > static void print_verbose_info(struct task_struct *task) > > @@ -390,12 +403,12 @@ static void print_report(enum kcsan_value_change value_change, > > struct other_info *other_info, > > u64 old, u64 new, u64 mask) > > { > > - unsigned long reordered_to = 0; > > + unsigned long reordered_to[NUM_STACK_ENTRIES] = { 0 }; > > unsigned long stack_entries[NUM_STACK_ENTRIES] = { 0 }; > > int num_stack_entries = stack_trace_save(stack_entries, NUM_STACK_ENTRIES, 1); > > - int skipnr = sanitize_stack_entries(stack_entries, num_stack_entries, ai->ip, &reordered_to); > > + int skipnr = sanitize_stack_entries(stack_entries, num_stack_entries, ai->ip, reordered_to); > > unsigned long this_frame = stack_entries[skipnr]; > > - unsigned long other_reordered_to = 0; > > + unsigned long other_reordered_to[NUM_STACK_ENTRIES] = { 0 }; > > unsigned long other_frame = 0; > > int other_skipnr = 0; /* silence uninit warnings */ > > > > @@ -408,7 +421,7 @@ static void print_report(enum kcsan_value_change value_change, > > if (other_info) { > > other_skipnr = sanitize_stack_entries(other_info->stack_entries, > > other_info->num_stack_entries, > > - other_info->ai.ip, &other_reordered_to); > > + other_info->ai.ip, other_reordered_to); > > other_frame = other_info->stack_entries[other_skipnr]; > > > > /* @value_change is only known for the other thread */ > > -- > > 2.34.1.400.ga245620fadb-goog > >