LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: [PATCH] ring-buffer: add paranoid checks for loops
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 18:48:00 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0810291439460.13214@gandalf.stny.rr.com> (raw)


[ for 2.6.28 ]

While writing a new tracer, I had a bug where I caused the ring-buffer
to recurse in a bad way. The bug was with the tracer I was writing
and not the ring-buffer itself. But it took a long time to find the
problem.

This patch adds paranoid checks into the ring-buffer infrastructure
that will catch bugs of this nature.

Note: I put the bug back in the tracer and this patch showed the error
      nicely and prevented the lockup.

Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com>
---
 kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c |   45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+)

Index: linux-tip.git/kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c
===================================================================
--- linux-tip.git.orig/kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c	2008-10-29 12:38:54.000000000 -0400
+++ linux-tip.git/kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c	2008-10-29 16:11:00.000000000 -0400
@@ -1022,8 +1022,20 @@ rb_reserve_next_event(struct ring_buffer
 	struct ring_buffer_event *event;
 	u64 ts, delta;
 	int commit = 0;
+	int paranoid = 0;
 
  again:
+	/*
+	 * If we loop here 1,000 times, that means we are either
+	 * in an interrupt storm, or we have something buggy.
+	 * Bail!
+	 */
+	if (unlikely(paranoid > 1000)) {
+		RB_WARN_ON(cpu_buffer, 1);
+		return NULL;
+	}
+	paranoid++;
+
 	ts = ring_buffer_time_stamp(cpu_buffer->cpu);
 
 	/*
@@ -1532,10 +1544,21 @@ rb_get_reader_page(struct ring_buffer_pe
 {
 	struct buffer_page *reader = NULL;
 	unsigned long flags;
+	int paranoid = 0;
 
 	spin_lock_irqsave(&cpu_buffer->lock, flags);
 
  again:
+	/*
+	 * We can call here a couple of times, lets only allow 5.
+	 */
+	if (unlikely(paranoid > 4)) {
+		RB_WARN_ON(cpu_buffer, 1);
+		reader = NULL;
+		goto out;
+	}
+	paranoid++;
+
 	reader = cpu_buffer->reader_page;
 
 	/* If there's more to read, return this page */
@@ -1665,6 +1688,7 @@ ring_buffer_peek(struct ring_buffer *buf
 	struct ring_buffer_per_cpu *cpu_buffer;
 	struct ring_buffer_event *event;
 	struct buffer_page *reader;
+	int paranoid = 0;
 
 	if (!cpu_isset(cpu, buffer->cpumask))
 		return NULL;
@@ -1672,6 +1696,16 @@ ring_buffer_peek(struct ring_buffer *buf
 	cpu_buffer = buffer->buffers[cpu];
 
  again:
+	/*
+	 * This could happen a few times, but if more than
+	 * 10 times, then something is probably wrong.
+	 */
+	if (unlikely(paranoid > 10)) {
+		RB_WARN_ON(cpu_buffer, 1);
+		return NULL;
+	}
+	paranoid++;
+
 	reader = rb_get_reader_page(cpu_buffer);
 	if (!reader)
 		return NULL;
@@ -1722,6 +1756,7 @@ ring_buffer_iter_peek(struct ring_buffer
 	struct ring_buffer *buffer;
 	struct ring_buffer_per_cpu *cpu_buffer;
 	struct ring_buffer_event *event;
+	int paranoid = 0;
 
 	if (ring_buffer_iter_empty(iter))
 		return NULL;
@@ -1730,6 +1765,16 @@ ring_buffer_iter_peek(struct ring_buffer
 	buffer = cpu_buffer->buffer;
 
  again:
+	/*
+	 * This could happen a few times, but if more than
+	 * 10 times, then something is probably wrong.
+	 */
+	if (unlikely(paranoid > 10)) {
+		RB_WARN_ON(cpu_buffer, 1);
+		return NULL;
+	}
+	paranoid++;
+
 	if (rb_per_cpu_empty(cpu_buffer))
 		return NULL;
 

             reply	other threads:[~2008-10-29 23:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-10-29 22:48 Steven Rostedt [this message]
2008-10-30 18:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-30 19:00   ` Steven Rostedt
2008-10-31  3:16   ` [PATCH -v2] " Steven Rostedt
2008-10-31  9:38     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-31 13:58       ` [PATCH -v3] " Steven Rostedt
2008-11-03 10:10         ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-31 14:00       ` [PATCH -v2] " Steven Rostedt

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.1.10.0810291439460.13214@gandalf.stny.rr.com \
    --to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH] ring-buffer: add paranoid checks for loops' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).