lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jan]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH -rcu 2/2] kcsan: Rate-limit reporting per data races
On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 at 19:20, Marco Elver <elver@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 at 16:23, Marco Elver <elver@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > Adds support for rate limiting reports. This uses a time based rate
> > limit, that limits any given data race report to no more than one in a
> > fixed time window (default is 3 sec). This should prevent the console
> > from being spammed with data race reports, that would render the system
> > unusable.
> >
> > The implementation assumes that unique data races and the rate at which
> > they occur is bounded, since we cannot store arbitrarily many past data
> > race report information: we use a fixed-size array to store the required
> > information. We cannot use kmalloc/krealloc and resize the list when
> > needed, as reporting is triggered by the instrumentation calls; to
> > permit using KCSAN on the allocators, we cannot (re-)allocate any memory
> > during report generation (data races in the allocators lead to
> > deadlock).
> >
> > Reported-by: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
> > Suggested-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
> > ---
> > kernel/kcsan/report.c | 112 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > lib/Kconfig.kcsan | 10 ++++
> > 2 files changed, 112 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/kcsan/report.c b/kernel/kcsan/report.c
> > index 9f503ca2ff7a..e324af7d14c9 100644
> > --- a/kernel/kcsan/report.c
> > +++ b/kernel/kcsan/report.c
> > @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
> > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> >
> > #include <linux/kernel.h>
> > +#include <linux/ktime.h>
> > #include <linux/preempt.h>
> > #include <linux/printk.h>
> > #include <linux/sched.h>
> > @@ -31,12 +32,101 @@ static struct {
> > int num_stack_entries;
> > } other_info = { .ptr = NULL };
> >
> > +/*
> > + * Information about reported data races; used to rate limit reporting.
> > + */
> > +struct report_time {
> > + /*
> > + * The last time the data race was reported.
> > + */
> > + ktime_t time;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * The frames of the 2 threads; if only 1 thread is known, one frame
> > + * will be 0.
> > + */
> > + unsigned long frame1;
> > + unsigned long frame2;
> > +};
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Since we also want to be able to debug allocators with KCSAN, to avoid
> > + * deadlock, report_times cannot be dynamically resized with krealloc in
> > + * rate_limit_report.
> > + *
> > + * Therefore, we use a fixed-size array, which at most will occupy a page. This
> > + * still adequately rate limits reports, assuming that a) number of unique data
> > + * races is not excessive, and b) occurrence of unique data races within the
> > + * same time window is limited.
> > + */
> > +#define REPORT_TIMES_MAX (PAGE_SIZE / sizeof(struct report_time))
> > +#define REPORT_TIMES_SIZE \
> > + (CONFIG_KCSAN_REPORT_ONCE_IN_MS > REPORT_TIMES_MAX ? \
> > + REPORT_TIMES_MAX : \
> > + CONFIG_KCSAN_REPORT_ONCE_IN_MS)
> > +static struct report_time report_times[REPORT_TIMES_SIZE];
> > +
> > /*
> > * This spinlock protects reporting and other_info, since other_info is usually
> > * required when reporting.
> > */
> > static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(report_lock);
> >
> > +/*
> > + * Checks if the data race identified by thread frames frame1 and frame2 has
> > + * been reported since (now - KCSAN_REPORT_ONCE_IN_MS).
> > + */
> > +static bool rate_limit_report(unsigned long frame1, unsigned long frame2)
> > +{
> > + struct report_time *use_entry = &report_times[0];
> > + ktime_t now;
> > + ktime_t invalid_before;
> > + int i;
> > +
> > + BUILD_BUG_ON(CONFIG_KCSAN_REPORT_ONCE_IN_MS != 0 && REPORT_TIMES_SIZE == 0);
> > +
> > + if (CONFIG_KCSAN_REPORT_ONCE_IN_MS == 0)
> > + return false;
> > +
> > + now = ktime_get();
> > + invalid_before = ktime_sub_ms(now, CONFIG_KCSAN_REPORT_ONCE_IN_MS);
>
> Been thinking about this a bit more, and wondering if we should just
> use jiffies here? Don't think we need the precision.

Sent v2: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200110184834.192636-1-elver@google.com
I think it's also safer to use jiffies, as noted in the v2 patch.

Paul: sorry for sending v2, seeing you already had these in your tree.
Hope this is ok.

Thanks,
-- Marco

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-01-10 19:54    [W:0.078 / U:7.132 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site