From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] x86/mce: Avoid infinite loop for copy from user recovery
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2021 18:57:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210128175735.GB2120@zn.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210126223605.GA14355@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com>
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 02:36:05PM -0800, Luck, Tony wrote:
> In some cases Linux might context switch to something else. Perhaps
> this task even gets picked up by another CPU to run the task work
> queued functions. But I imagine that the context switch should act
> as a barrier ... shouldn't it?
I'm given to understand that the #MC from user is likely to schedule and
a context switch has a barrier character.
> After a few cycles of the test injection to user mode, I saw an
> overflow in the machine check bank. As if it hadn't been cleared
> from the previous iteration ...
This sounds weird. As if something else is happening which we haven't
thought of yet...
> When the tests were failing, code was on top of v5.11-rc3. Latest
> experiments moved to -rc5. There's just a tracing fix from
> PeterZ between rc3 and rc5 to mce/core.c:
>
> 737495361d44 ("x86/mce: Remove explicit/superfluous tracing")
>
> which doesn't appear to be a candidate for the problems I saw.
Doesn't look like it.
> This is the bit that changed during my detour using atomic_t mce_count.
> I added the local variable to capture value from atomic_inc_return(), then
> used it later, instead of a bunch of atomic_read() calls.
>
> I kept it this way because "if (count == 1)" is marginally easier to read
> than "if (current->mce_count++ == 0)"
Right.
So still no explanation why it would fail before. ;-\
Crazy idea: if you still can reproduce on -rc3, you could bisect: i.e.,
if you apply the patch on -rc3 and it explodes and if you apply the same
patch on -rc5 and it works, then that could be a start... Yeah, don't
have a better idea here. :-\
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-28 17:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-08 22:22 [PATCH 0/2] Fix infinite machine check loop in futex_wait_setup() Tony Luck
2021-01-08 22:22 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86/mce: Avoid infinite loop for copy from user recovery Tony Luck
2021-01-08 22:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] futex, x86/mce: Avoid double machine checks Tony Luck
2021-01-08 22:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-01-08 23:08 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-08 23:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-01-08 23:20 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-11 21:44 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] Fix infinite machine check loop in futex_wait_setup() Tony Luck
2021-01-11 21:44 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] x86/mce: Avoid infinite loop for copy from user recovery Tony Luck
2021-01-11 22:11 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-11 22:20 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-12 17:00 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-12 17:16 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-12 17:21 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-12 18:23 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-12 18:57 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-12 20:52 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-12 22:04 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-13 1:50 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-13 4:15 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-13 10:00 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-13 16:06 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-13 16:19 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-13 16:32 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-13 17:35 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-14 20:22 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-14 21:05 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-11 21:44 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] x86/mce: Add new return value to get_user() for machine check Tony Luck
2021-01-11 21:44 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] futex, x86/mce: Avoid double machine checks Tony Luck
2021-01-14 17:22 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] Fix infinite machine check loop in futex_wait_setup() Andy Lutomirski
2021-01-15 0:38 ` [PATCH v3] x86/mce: Avoid infinite loop for copy from user recovery Tony Luck
2021-01-15 15:27 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-15 19:34 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-15 20:51 ` [PATCH v4] " Luck, Tony
2021-01-15 23:23 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-19 10:56 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-19 23:57 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-20 12:18 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-20 17:17 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-21 21:09 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-25 22:55 ` [PATCH v5] " Luck, Tony
2021-01-26 11:03 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-01-26 22:36 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-28 17:57 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2021-02-01 18:58 ` Luck, Tony
2021-02-02 11:01 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-02-02 16:04 ` Luck, Tony
2021-02-02 21:06 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-02-02 22:12 ` Luck, Tony
2021-01-18 15:39 ` [PATCH v3] " Borislav Petkov
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=20210128175735.GB2120@zn.tnic \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-edac@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.