Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 19 Apr 2023 20:03:05 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] mm: hwpoison: coredump: support recovery from dump_user_range() | From | Kefeng Wang <> |
| |
On 2023/4/19 15:25, HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) wrote: > On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 05:45:06PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote: >> >> >> On 2023/4/18 11:13, HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) wrote: >>> On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 12:53:23PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote: >>>> The dump_user_range() is used to copy the user page to a coredump file, >>>> but if a hardware memory error occurred during copy, which called from >>>> __kernel_write_iter() in dump_user_range(), it crashes, >>>> >>>> CPU: 112 PID: 7014 Comm: mca-recover Not tainted 6.3.0-rc2 #425 >>>> pc : __memcpy+0x110/0x260 >>>> lr : _copy_from_iter+0x3bc/0x4c8 >>>> ... >>>> Call trace: >>>> __memcpy+0x110/0x260 >>>> copy_page_from_iter+0xcc/0x130 >>>> pipe_write+0x164/0x6d8 >>>> __kernel_write_iter+0x9c/0x210 >>>> dump_user_range+0xc8/0x1d8 >>>> elf_core_dump+0x308/0x368 >>>> do_coredump+0x2e8/0xa40 >>>> get_signal+0x59c/0x788 >>>> do_signal+0x118/0x1f8 >>>> do_notify_resume+0xf0/0x280 >>>> el0_da+0x130/0x138 >>>> el0t_64_sync_handler+0x68/0xc0 >>>> el0t_64_sync+0x188/0x190 >>>> >>>> Generally, the '->write_iter' of file ops will use copy_page_from_iter() >>>> and copy_page_from_iter_atomic(), change memcpy() to copy_mc_to_kernel() >>>> in both of them to handle #MC during source read, which stop coredump >>>> processing and kill the task instead of kernel panic, but the source >>>> address may not always a user address, so introduce a new copy_mc flag in >>>> struct iov_iter{} to indicate that the iter could do a safe memory copy, >>>> also introduce the helpers to set/cleck the flag, for now, it's only >>>> used in coredump's dump_user_range(), but it could expand to any other >>>> scenarios to fix the similar issue. >>>> >>>> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> >>>> Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org> >>>> Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> >>>> Cc: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com> >>>> Cc: Tong Tiangen <tongtiangen@huawei.com> >>>> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> >>>> Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> >>>> --- >>>> v2: >>>> - move the helper functions under pre-existing CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_COPY_MC >>>> - reposition the copy_mc in struct iov_iter for easy merge, suggested >>>> by Andrew Morton >>>> - drop unnecessary clear flag helper >>>> - fix checkpatch warning >>>> fs/coredump.c | 1 + >>>> include/linux/uio.h | 16 ++++++++++++++++ >>>> lib/iov_iter.c | 17 +++++++++++++++-- >>>> 3 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>> ... >>>> @@ -371,6 +372,14 @@ size_t _copy_mc_to_iter(const void *addr, size_t bytes, struct iov_iter *i) >>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(_copy_mc_to_iter); >>>> #endif /* CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_COPY_MC */ >>>> +static void *memcpy_from_iter(struct iov_iter *i, void *to, const void *from, >>>> + size_t size) >>>> +{ >>>> + if (iov_iter_is_copy_mc(i)) >>>> + return (void *)copy_mc_to_kernel(to, from, size); >>> >>> Is it helpful to call memory_failure_queue() if copy_mc_to_kernel() fails >>> due to a memory error? >> >> For dump_user_range(), the task is dying, if copy incomplete size, the >> coredump will fail and task will exit, also memory_failure will >> be called by kill_me_maybe(), >> >> CPU: 0 PID: 1418 Comm: test Tainted: G M 6.3.0-rc5 #29 >> Call Trace: >> <TASK> >> dump_stack_lvl+0x37/0x50 >> memory_failure+0x51/0x970 >> kill_me_maybe+0x5b/0xc0 >> task_work_run+0x5a/0x90 >> exit_to_user_mode_prepare+0x194/0x1a0 >> irqentry_exit_to_user_mode+0x9/0x30 >> noist_exc_machine_check+0x40/0x80 >> asm_exc_machine_check+0x33/0x40 > > Is this call trace printed out when copy_mc_to_kernel() failed by finding > a memory error (or in some testcase using error injection)?
I add dump_stack() into memory_failure() to check whether the poisoned memory is called or not, and the call trace shows it do call memory_failure(), but I get confused when do the test.
> In my understanding, an MCE should not be triggered when MC-safe copy tries > to access to a memory error. So I feel that we might be talking about > different scenarios. > > When I questioned previously, I thought about the following scenario: > > - a process terminates abnormally for any reason like segmentation fault, > - then, kernel tries to create a coredump, > - during this, the copying routine accesses to corrupted page to read. > Yes, we tested like your described,
1) inject memory error into a process 2) send a SIGABT/SIGBUS to process to trigger the coredump
Without patch, the system panic, and with patch only process exits.
> In this case the corrupted page should not be handled by memory_failure() > yet (because otherwise properly handled hwpoisoned page should be ignored > by coredump process). The coredump process would exit with failure with > your patch, but then, the corrupted page is still left unhandled and can > be reused, so any other thread can easily access to it again.
As shown above, the corrupted page will be handled by memory_failure(), but what I'm wondering, 1) memory_failure() is not always called 2) look at the above call trace, it looks like from asynchronous interrupt, not from synchronous exception, right?
> > You can find a few other places (like __wp_page_copy_user and ksm_might_need_to_copy) > to call memory_failure_queue() to cope with such unhandled error pages. > So does memcpy_from_iter() do the same?
I add some debug print in do_machine_check() on x86:
1) COW, m.kflags: MCE_IN_KERNEL_RECOV fixup_type: EX_TYPE_DEFAULT_MCE_SAFE
CPU: 11 PID: 2038 Comm: einj_mem_uc Call Trace: <#MC> dump_stack_lvl+0x37/0x50 do_machine_check+0x7ad/0x840 exc_machine_check+0x5a/0x90 asm_exc_machine_check+0x1e/0x40 RIP: 0010:copy_mc_fragile+0x35/0x62
if (m.kflags & MCE_IN_KERNEL_RECOV) { if (!fixup_exception(regs, X86_TRAP_MC, 0, 0)) mce_panic("Failed kernel mode recovery", &m, msg); }
if (m.kflags & MCE_IN_KERNEL_COPYIN) queue_task_work(&m, msg, kill_me_never);
There is no memory_failure() called when EX_TYPE_DEFAULT_MCE_SAFE, also EX_TYPE_FAULT_MCE_SAFE too, so we manually add a memory_failure_queue() to handle with the poisoned page.
2) Coredump, nothing print about m.kflags and fixup_type, with above check, add a memory_failure_queue() or memory_failure() seems to be needed for memcpy_from_iter(), but it is totally different from the COW scenario
Another question, other copy_mc_to_kernel() callers, eg, nvdimm/dm-writecache/dax, there are not call memory_failure_queue(), should they need a memory_failure_queue(), if so, why not add it into do_machine_check() ?
Thanks.
> > Thanks, > Naoya Horiguchi
| |