On Wed 2018-02-28 11:23:34, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Sat 2018-02-24 13:34:05, kernel test robot wrote:
> > TO: Petr Mladek <pmla...@suse.com>
> > CC: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com>, Dave Hansen 
> > <dave.han...@intel.com>, Johannes Weiner <han...@cmpxchg.org>, Mel Gorman 
> > <mgor...@suse.de>, Michal Hocko <mho...@kernel.org>, Vlastimil Babka 
> > <vba...@suse.cz>, Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org>, Linus Torvalds 
> > <torva...@linux-foundation.org>, Jan Kara <j...@suse.cz>, Mathieu Desnoyers 
> > <mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com>, Tetsuo Handa 
> > <penguin-ker...@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>, Byungchul Park 
> > <byungchul.p...@lge.com>, Tejun Heo <t...@kernel.org>, Pavel Machek 
> > <pa...@ucw.cz>, Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rost...@goodmis.org>, Sergey 
> > Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhat...@gmail.com>, LKML 
> > <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, l...@01.org
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-7):
> > 
> > commit: c162d5b4338d72deed61aa65ed0f2f4ba2bbc8ab ("printk: Hide console 
> > waiter logic into helpers")
> > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
> > 
> > in testcase: boot
> > 
> > on test machine: qemu-system-x86_64 -enable-kvm -cpu host -smp 2 -m 1G
> > 
> > caused below changes (please refer to attached dmesg/kmsg for entire 
> > log/backtrace):
> > 
> > 
> > +--------------------------------+------------+------------+
> > |                                | dbdda842fe | c162d5b433 |
> > +--------------------------------+------------+------------+
> > | boot_successes                 | 0          | 0          |
> > | boot_failures                  | 18         | 16         |
> > | BUG:KASAN:use-after-scope_in_p | 18         |            |
> > | BUG:KASAN:use-after-scope_in_c | 0          | 16         |
> > +--------------------------------+------------+------------+
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > [    0.003333] BUG: KASAN: use-after-scope in console_unlock+0x185/0x960
> > [    0.003333] BUG: KASAN: use-after-scope in console_unlock+0x185/0x960
> 
> Is there any change to get disassembly of console_unlock() from the
> problematic build?
> 
> I have troubles to reproduce this myself. Also I was not able to find any
> bug just by looking into the code yet. The disassembly might help
> a lot here.
> 
> 
> Interesting symptoms (for myself and other debuggers):
> 
> The lines are duplicated. Therefore it happened when real
> console was registered and before the early console was unregistered.
> See also the full dmesg for these actions. The related printk messages
> are right after the KASAN report.
> 
> I wonder if it is unsafe to pass the console_lock via
> console_trylock_spinnning() from console_unlock() called
> in register_console(). I do not see any problem but I might
> be blind.

The KASAN report is between the following lines in dmesg:

[    0.003333]  Offload RCU callbacks from CPUs: .
[    0.003333] 
==================================================================
[    0.003333] 
==================================================================
[    0.003333] BUG: KASAN: use-after-scope in console_unlock+0x185/0x960
[    0.003333] BUG: KASAN: use-after-scope in console_unlock+0x185/0x960
[...]
[    0.003333] console [ttyS0] enabled

The first message is printed from rcu_init_nohz().
The last message is printed from register_console().

I would expect that the KASAN message is triggered from the following
code:

        rcu_init_nohz();
        init_timers();
        hrtimers_init();
        softirq_init();
        timekeeping_init();
        time_init();
        sched_clock_postinit();
        printk_safe_init();
        perf_event_init();
        profile_init();
        call_function_init();
        WARN(!irqs_disabled(), "Interrupts were enabled early\n");
        early_boot_irqs_disabled = false;
        local_irq_enable();

        kmem_cache_init_late();

        /*
         * HACK ALERT! This is early. We're enabling the console before
         * we've done PCI setups etc, and console_init() must be aware of
         * this. But we do want output early, in case something goes wrong.
         */
        console_init();


I am just confused that I do not see any of this function on the
stack. Note that this code is still called in the single CPU mode.

I feel lost a bit.

I am really curious what code is proceed on the line
console_unlock+0x185/0x960.

Best Regards,
Petr

Reply via email to