Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAG_fn=Xs-OqpVCW5KyQLYKXNmQ4aH-KDjY0BrWpqMfPKcu-dug@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220421121018.60860-1-huangshaobo6@huawei.com> <CAG_fn=UxSwgO8D2dCkM3vWPwcz0-rjvFdwr37cxYUt4awT3crA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAG_fn=UxSwgO8D2dCkM3vWPwcz0-rjvFdwr37cxYUt4awT3crA@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 21 Apr 2022 15:28:45 +0200
Message-ID: <CANpmjNM0qeKraYviOXFO4znVE3hUdG8-0VbFbzXzWH8twtQM9w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kfence: check kfence canary in panic and reboot
To:     Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>
Cc:     Shaobo Huang <huangshaobo6@huawei.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        chenzefeng2@huawei.com, Dmitriy Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        nixiaoming@huawei.com, wangbing6@huawei.com,
        wangfangpeng1@huawei.com, young.liuyang@huawei.com,
        zengweilin@huawei.com, zhongjubin@huawei.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 at 15:06, Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com> wrote:
[...]
> This report will denote that in a system that could have been running for days a particular skbuff was corrupted by some unknown task at some unknown point in time.
> How do we figure out what exactly caused this corruption?
>
> When we deploy KFENCE at scale, it is rarely possible for the kernel developer to get access to the host that reported the bug and try to reproduce it.
> With that in mind, the report (plus the kernel source) must contain all the necessary information to address the bug, otherwise reporting it will result in wasting the developer's time.
> Moreover, if we report such bugs too often, our tool loses the credit, which is hard to regain.

I second this - in particular we'll want this off in fuzzers etc.,
because it'll just generate reports that nobody can use to debug an
issue. I do see the value in this in potentially narrowing the cause
of a panic, but that information is likely not enough to fully
diagnose the root cause of the panic - it might however prompt to
re-run with KASAN, or check if memory DIMMs are faulty etc.

We can still have this feature, but I suggest to make it
off-by-default, and only enable via a boot param. I'd call it
'kfence.check_on_panic'. For your setup, you can then use it to enable
where you see fit.

Thanks,
-- Marco