Re: [PATCH] kcsan: Add option for verbose reporting

From: Marco Elver
Date: Fri Feb 21 2020 - 18:01:04 EST

Next message: Ira Weiny: "Re: [PATCH V4 03/13] fs: Remove unneeded IS_DAX() check"
Previous message: Ira Weiny: "Re: [PATCH V4 02/13] fs/xfs: Clarify lockdep dependency for xfs_isilocked()"
In reply to: Paul E. McKenney: "Re: [PATCH] kcsan: Add option for verbose reporting"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 at 19:04, Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 06:58:36PM +0100, Marco Elver wrote:
> > On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 at 18:10, Qian Cai <cai@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2020-02-19 at 16:15 +0100, Marco Elver wrote:
> > > > Adds CONFIG_KCSAN_VERBOSE to optionally enable more verbose reports.
> > > > Currently information about the reporting task's held locks and IRQ
> > > > trace events are shown, if they are enabled.
> > >
> > > Well, there is a report. I don't understand why it said there is no lock held in
> > > the writer, but clearly there is this right after in
> > > jbd2_journal_commit_transaction(),
> > >
> > > spin_unlock(&jh->b_state_lock);
> >
> > This is sort of expected right now. In the comment that adds this
> > feature, it also has a comment for the "other thread" (in this case
> > the writer):
> >
> > /*
> > * Showing held locks for a running task is unreliable, so just
> > * skip this. The printed locks are very likely inconsistent,
> > * since the stack trace was obtained when the actual race
> > * occurred and the task has since continued execution. Since we
> > * cannot display the below information from the racing thread,
> > * but must print it all from the watcher thread, bail out.
> > * Note: Even if the task is not running, there is a chance that
> > * the locks held may be inconsistent.
> > */
> >
> > Hmm, I suppose I could try harder and make this reliable by stalling
> > the other task if this option is on. Let me give that a try.
>
> And here I thought that I was just being unlucky when I never saw any
> locks held. ;-)

Sent the new version:
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200221225635.218857-1-elver@xxxxxxxxxx
It was fun to get this one right, so please test more. :-)

Thanks,
-- Marco

> Thanx, Paul
>
> > Thanks,
> > -- Marco
> >
> >
> > > [ 2268.021382][T25724] BUG: KCSAN: data-race in __jbd2_journal_refile_buffer
> > > [jbd2] / jbd2_write_access_granted [jbd2]
> > > [ 2268.031888][T25724]
> > > [ 2268.034099][T25724] write to 0xffff99f9b1bd0e30 of 8 bytes by task 25721 on
> > > cpu 70:
> > > [ 2268.041842][T25724] __jbd2_journal_refile_buffer+0xdd/0x210 [jbd2]
> > > __jbd2_journal_refile_buffer at fs/jbd2/transaction.c:2569
> > > [ 2268.048181][T25724] jbd2_journal_commit_transaction+0x2d15/0x3f20 [jbd2]
> > > (inlined by) jbd2_journal_commit_transaction at fs/jbd2/commit.c:1033
> > > [ 2268.055042][T25724] kjournald2+0x13b/0x450 [jbd2]
> > > [ 2268.059876][T25724] kthread+0x1cd/0x1f0
> > > [ 2268.063835][T25724] ret_from_fork+0x27/0x50
> > > [ 2268.068143][T25724]
> > > [ 2268.070348][T25724] no locks held by jbd2/loop0-8/25721.
> > > [ 2268.075699][T25724] irq event stamp: 77604
> > > [ 2268.079830][T25724] hardirqs last enabled at (77603): [<ffffffff986da853>]
> > > _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60
> > > [ 2268.090166][T25724] hardirqs last disabled at (77604): [<ffffffff986d0841>]
> > > __schedule+0x181/0xa50
> > > [ 2268.099192][T25724] softirqs last enabled at (76092): [<ffffffff98a0034c>]
> > > __do_softirq+0x34c/0x57c
> > > [ 2268.108392][T25724] softirqs last disabled at (76005): [<ffffffff97cc67a2>]
> > > irq_exit+0xa2/0xc0
> > > [ 2268.117062][T25724]
> > > [ 2268.119269][T25724] read to 0xffff99f9b1bd0e30 of 8 bytes by task 25724 on
> > > cpu 68:
> > > [ 2268.126916][T25724] jbd2_write_access_granted+0x1b2/0x250 [jbd2]
> > > jbd2_write_access_granted at fs/jbd2/transaction.c:1155
> > > [ 2268.133086][T25724] jbd2_journal_get_write_access+0x2c/0x60 [jbd2]
> > > [ 2268.139492][T25724] __ext4_journal_get_write_access+0x50/0x90 [ext4]
> > > [ 2268.146076][T25724] ext4_mb_mark_diskspace_used+0x158/0x620 [ext4]
> > > [ 2268.152507][T25724] ext4_mb_new_blocks+0x54f/0xca0 [ext4]
> > > [ 2268.158125][T25724] ext4_ind_map_blocks+0xc79/0x1b40 [ext4]
> > > [ 2268.163923][T25724] ext4_map_blocks+0x3b4/0x950 [ext4]
> > > [ 2268.169284][T25724] _ext4_get_block+0xfc/0x270 [ext4]
> > > [ 2268.174556][T25724] ext4_get_block+0x3b/0x50 [ext4]
> > > [ 2268.179566][T25724] __block_write_begin_int+0x22e/0xae0
> > > [ 2268.184921][T25724] __block_write_begin+0x39/0x50
> > > [ 2268.189842][T25724] ext4_write_begin+0x388/0xb50 [ext4]
> > > [ 2268.195195][T25724] generic_perform_write+0x15d/0x290
> > > [ 2268.200467][T25724] ext4_buffered_write_iter+0x11f/0x210 [ext4]
> > > [ 2268.206612][T25724] ext4_file_write_iter+0xce/0x9e0 [ext4]
> > > [ 2268.212228][T25724] new_sync_write+0x29c/0x3b0
> > > [ 2268.216794][T25724] __vfs_write+0x92/0xa0
> > > [ 2268.220924][T25724] vfs_write+0x103/0x260
> > > [ 2268.225052][T25724] ksys_write+0x9d/0x130
> > > [ 2268.229182][T25724] __x64_sys_write+0x4c/0x60
> > > [ 2268.233666][T25724] do_syscall_64+0x91/0xb05
> > > [ 2268.238058][T25724] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe
> > > [ 2268.243846][T25724]
> > > [ 2268.246056][T25724] 5 locks held by fsync04/25724:
> > > [ 2268.250880][T25724] #0: ffff99f9911093f8 (sb_writers#13){.+.+}, at:
> > > vfs_write+0x21c/0x260
> > > [ 2268.259211][T25724] #1: ffff99f9db4c0348 (&sb->s_type-
> > > >i_mutex_key#15){+.+.}, at: ext4_buffered_write_iter+0x65/0x210 [ext4]
> > > [ 2268.270693][T25724] #2: ffff99f5e7dfcf58 (jbd2_handle){++++}, at:
> > > start_this_handle+0x1c1/0x9d0 [jbd2]
> > > [ 2268.280180][T25724] #3: ffff99f9db4c0168 (&ei->i_data_sem){++++}, at:
> > > ext4_map_blocks+0x176/0x950 [ext4]
> > > [ 2268.289913][T25724] #4: ffffffff99086b40 (rcu_read_lock){....}, at:
> > > jbd2_write_access_granted+0x4e/0x250 [jbd2]
> > > [ 2268.300187][T25724] irq event stamp: 1407125
> > > [ 2268.304496][T25724] hardirqs last enabled at (1407125): [<ffffffff980da9b7>]
> > > __find_get_block+0x107/0x790
> > > [ 2268.314218][T25724] hardirqs last disabled at (1407124): [<ffffffff980da8f9>]
> > > __find_get_block+0x49/0x790
> > > [ 2268.323856][T25724] softirqs last enabled at (1405528): [<ffffffff98a0034c>]
> > > __do_softirq+0x34c/0x57c
> > > [ 2268.333229][T25724] softirqs last disabled at (1405521): [<ffffffff97cc67a2>]
> > > irq_exit+0xa2/0xc0
> > > [ 2268.342075][T25724]
> > > [ 2268.344282][T25724] Reported by Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer on:
> > > [ 2268.350339][T25724] CPU: 68 PID: 25724 Comm: fsync04 Tainted:
> > > G L 5.6.0-rc2-next-20200221+ #7
> > > [ 2268.360234][T25724] Hardware name: HPE ProLiant DL385 Gen10/ProLiant DL385
> > > Gen10, BIOS A40 07/10/2019
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <elver@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Suggested-by: Qian Cai <cai@xxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > kernel/kcsan/report.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > lib/Kconfig.kcsan | 13 ++++++++++++
> > > > 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/kernel/kcsan/report.c b/kernel/kcsan/report.c
> > > > index 11c791b886f3c..f14becb6f1537 100644
> > > > --- a/kernel/kcsan/report.c
> > > > +++ b/kernel/kcsan/report.c
> > > > @@ -1,10 +1,12 @@
> > > > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > > >
> > > > +#include <linux/debug_locks.h>
> > > > #include <linux/jiffies.h>
> > > > #include <linux/kernel.h>
> > > > #include <linux/lockdep.h>
> > > > #include <linux/preempt.h>
> > > > #include <linux/printk.h>
> > > > +#include <linux/rcupdate.h>
> > > > #include <linux/sched.h>
> > > > #include <linux/spinlock.h>
> > > > #include <linux/stacktrace.h>
> > > > @@ -245,6 +247,29 @@ static int sym_strcmp(void *addr1, void *addr2)
> > > > return strncmp(buf1, buf2, sizeof(buf1));
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > +static void print_verbose_info(struct task_struct *task)
> > > > +{
> > > > + if (!task)
> > > > + return;
> > > > +
> > > > + if (task != current && task->state == TASK_RUNNING)
> > > > + /*
> > > > + * Showing held locks for a running task is unreliable, so just
> > > > + * skip this. The printed locks are very likely inconsistent,
> > > > + * since the stack trace was obtained when the actual race
> > > > + * occurred and the task has since continued execution. Since we
> > > > + * cannot display the below information from the racing thread,
> > > > + * but must print it all from the watcher thread, bail out.
> > > > + * Note: Even if the task is not running, there is a chance that
> > > > + * the locks held may be inconsistent.
> > > > + */
> > > > + return;
> > > > +
> > > > + pr_err("\n");
> > > > + debug_show_held_locks(task);
> > > > + print_irqtrace_events(task);
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > /*
> > > > * Returns true if a report was generated, false otherwise.
> > > > */
> > > > @@ -319,6 +344,26 @@ static bool print_report(const volatile void *ptr, size_t size, int access_type,
> > > > other_info.num_stack_entries - other_skipnr,
> > > > 0);
> > > >
> > > > + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KCSAN_VERBOSE) && other_info.task_pid != -1) {
> > > > + struct task_struct *other_task;
> > > > +
> > > > + /*
> > > > + * Rather than passing @current from the other task via
> > > > + * @other_info, obtain task_struct here. The problem
> > > > + * with passing @current via @other_info is that, we
> > > > + * would have to get_task_struct/put_task_struct, and if
> > > > + * we race with a task being released, we would have to
> > > > + * release it in release_report(). This may result in
> > > > + * deadlock if we want to use KCSAN on the allocators.
> > > > + * Instead, make this best-effort, and if the task was
> > > > + * already released, we just do not print anything here.
> > > > + */
> > > > + rcu_read_lock();
> > > > + other_task = find_task_by_pid_ns(other_info.task_pid, &init_pid_ns);
> > > > + print_verbose_info(other_task);
> > > > + rcu_read_unlock();
> > > > + }
> > > > +
> > > > pr_err("\n");
> > > > pr_err("%s to 0x%px of %zu bytes by %s on cpu %i:\n",
> > > > get_access_type(access_type), ptr, size,
> > > > @@ -340,6 +385,9 @@ static bool print_report(const volatile void *ptr, size_t size, int access_type,
> > > > stack_trace_print(stack_entries + skipnr, num_stack_entries - skipnr,
> > > > 0);
> > > >
> > > > + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KCSAN_VERBOSE))
> > > > + print_verbose_info(current);
> > > > +
> > > > /* Print report footer. */
> > > > pr_err("\n");
> > > > pr_err("Reported by Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer on:\n");
> > > > diff --git a/lib/Kconfig.kcsan b/lib/Kconfig.kcsan
> > > > index f0b791143c6ab..ba9268076cfbc 100644
> > > > --- a/lib/Kconfig.kcsan
> > > > +++ b/lib/Kconfig.kcsan
> > > > @@ -20,6 +20,19 @@ menuconfig KCSAN
> > > >
> > > > if KCSAN
> > > >
> > > > +config KCSAN_VERBOSE
> > > > + bool "Show verbose reports with more information about system state"
> > > > + depends on PROVE_LOCKING
> > > > + help
> > > > + If enabled, reports show more information about the system state that
> > > > + may help better analyze and debug races. This includes held locks and
> > > > + IRQ trace events.
> > > > +
> > > > + While this option should generally be benign, we call into more
> > > > + external functions on report generation; if a race report is
> > > > + generated from any one of them, system stability may suffer due to
> > > > + deadlocks or recursion. If in doubt, say N.
> > > > +
> > > > config KCSAN_DEBUG
> > > > bool "Debugging of KCSAN internals"
> > > >

Next message: Ira Weiny: "Re: [PATCH V4 03/13] fs: Remove unneeded IS_DAX() check"
Previous message: Ira Weiny: "Re: [PATCH V4 02/13] fs/xfs: Clarify lockdep dependency for xfs_isilocked()"
In reply to: Paul E. McKenney: "Re: [PATCH] kcsan: Add option for verbose reporting"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]