On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 5:03 PM Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:51 PM Russell King - ARM Linux admin
> <li...@armlinux.org.uk> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 04:44:45PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 11:17 AM Dmitry Vyukov <dvyu...@google.com> wrote:
> > > > The compiler is gcc version 10.2.1 20210110 (Debian 10.2.1-6)
> > >
> > > Ok, building with Ubuntu 10.2.1-1ubuntu1 20201207 locally, that's
> > > the closest I have installed, and I think the Debian and Ubuntu versions
> > > are generally quite close in case of gcc since they are maintained by
> > > the same packagers.
> >
> > ... which shouldn't be a problem - that's just over 1/4 of the stack
> > space. Could it be the syzbot's gcc is doing something weird and
> > inflating the stack frames?
>
> It's possible, I think that's really unlikely given that it's just Debian's
> gcc, which is as close to mainline as the version I was using.
>
> Uwe's DEBUG_STACKOVERFLOW patch from a while ago might
> help if this was the problem though:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20200108082913.29710-1-u.kleine-koe...@pengutronix.de/
>
> My best guess is something going wrong in the interrupt
> that triggered the preempt_schedule() which ended up calling
> task_stack_end_corrupted() in schedule_debug(), as you suggested
> earlier.
FWIW I see slightly larger frames with the config:
073ab64 <ima_calc_field_array_hash_tfm>:
8073ab64: e1a0c00d mov ip, sp
8073ab68: e92ddff0 push {r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, sl,
fp, ip, lr, pc}
8073ab6c: e24cb004 sub fp, ip, #4
8073ab70: e24ddfa7 sub sp, sp, #668 ; 0x29c
page_alloc can also do reclaim, I had the impression that reclaim can
be quite heavy-weight in all respects.
