Re: perf/tracepoint: another fuzzer generated lockup

[Frederic Weisbecker]

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 04:33:01PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 04:23:04PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >  /*
> > + * We must dis-allow sampling irq_work_exit() because perf event sampling
> > + * itself can cause irq_work, which would lead to an infinite loop;
> > + *
> > + *  1) irq_work_exit happens
> > + *  2) generates perf sample
> > + *  3) generates irq_work
> > + *  4) goto 1
> > + */
> > +TRACE_EVENT_PERF_PERM(irq_work_exit, is_sampling_event(p_event) ? -EPERM : 0);
> 
> And the only reason this doesn't feed fwd itself into oblivion for
> irq_work_enter() is because the irq_work_list must not be empty when the
> interrupt is raised, and queueing further work does not re-raise the
> IPI.

Right.

> 
> 
> Also, we should probably do something 'smart' for kprobes, as all of
> irq_work.c and plenty of perf itself is not __kprobe marked so you're
> all free to insert kprobes in the middle of perf and then attach perf to
> such a thing.
> 

True, ok I'm going to comment about that on your patch.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/