lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Oct]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [kprobes/x86] a19b2e3d78: WARNING:at_kernel/locking/lockdep.c:#trace_hardirqs_off_caller
On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 12:46:05AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 09:33:16 +0200
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> > > [ 87.018115] Call Trace:
> > > [ 87.025046] trace_hardirqs_off+0xd/0xf
> > > [ 87.034185] setjmp_pre_handler+0x6c/0x95
> > > [ 87.043738] kprobe_ftrace_handler+0xc3/0xf4
> >
> >
> > So setjmp_pre_handler() does:
> >
> > regs->flags &= ~X86_EFLAGS_IF;
> > trace_hardirqs_off();
> > regs->ip = (unsigned long)(jp->entry);
> >
> > Which clears IF on the regs, but those will only take effect after an
> > IRET, not instantly. This messes up he IRQ state tracing, which you're
> > telling it will instantly disable IRQs.
>
> Thanks for analyzing!
> And right, since IRQ should be off while jump handler, it changes
> regs->flags. (but ...why?)

Otherwise the IRET could re-enable interrupts?

> > A possible 'fix' would be to do local_irq_disable() in front of that,
> > but I got pretty lost in that stuff so I can't say for sure if that
> > makes sense or not.
>
> I'm not sure how lockdep traces irq-disabling state, but it seems
> that "enabling" irq state(trace_hardirqs_on()) is already missing
> from kprobes.

If you could point me at where that is supposed to happen I can have a
look at how that tracing works. I got lost in the code this morning.

> I'm considering to remove disabling-irq itself from jprobe.
> (Frankly to say, I would like to remove jprobe itself...)

That would obviously also solve all problems :-)

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-10-02 18:08    [W:0.088 / U:2.296 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site