summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/kernel
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>2008-10-31 09:58:35 -0400
committerIngo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>2008-11-03 11:10:04 +0100
commit818e3dd30a4ff34fff6d90e87ae59c73f6a53691 (patch)
treeab9db9dec53a0c0383476c8dfca17d75c83317f6 /kernel
parentb3aa557722b3d5858f14ca559e03461c24125aaf (diff)
downloadlinux-stable-818e3dd30a4ff34fff6d90e87ae59c73f6a53691.tar.gz
linux-stable-818e3dd30a4ff34fff6d90e87ae59c73f6a53691.tar.bz2
linux-stable-818e3dd30a4ff34fff6d90e87ae59c73f6a53691.zip
tracing, ring-buffer: add paranoid checks for loops
While writing a new tracer, I had a bug where I caused the ring-buffer to recurse in a bad way. The bug was with the tracer I was writing and not the ring-buffer itself. But it took a long time to find the problem. This patch adds paranoid checks into the ring-buffer infrastructure that will catch bugs of this nature. Note: I put the bug back in the tracer and this patch showed the error nicely and prevented the lockup. Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Diffstat (limited to 'kernel')
-rw-r--r--kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c56
1 files changed, 56 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c b/kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c
index cedf4e268285..3f3380638646 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c
@@ -1022,8 +1022,23 @@ rb_reserve_next_event(struct ring_buffer_per_cpu *cpu_buffer,
struct ring_buffer_event *event;
u64 ts, delta;
int commit = 0;
+ int nr_loops = 0;
again:
+ /*
+ * We allow for interrupts to reenter here and do a trace.
+ * If one does, it will cause this original code to loop
+ * back here. Even with heavy interrupts happening, this
+ * should only happen a few times in a row. If this happens
+ * 1000 times in a row, there must be either an interrupt
+ * storm or we have something buggy.
+ * Bail!
+ */
+ if (unlikely(++nr_loops > 1000)) {
+ RB_WARN_ON(cpu_buffer, 1);
+ return NULL;
+ }
+
ts = ring_buffer_time_stamp(cpu_buffer->cpu);
/*
@@ -1532,10 +1547,23 @@ rb_get_reader_page(struct ring_buffer_per_cpu *cpu_buffer)
{
struct buffer_page *reader = NULL;
unsigned long flags;
+ int nr_loops = 0;
spin_lock_irqsave(&cpu_buffer->lock, flags);
again:
+ /*
+ * This should normally only loop twice. But because the
+ * start of the reader inserts an empty page, it causes
+ * a case where we will loop three times. There should be no
+ * reason to loop four times (that I know of).
+ */
+ if (unlikely(++nr_loops > 3)) {
+ RB_WARN_ON(cpu_buffer, 1);
+ reader = NULL;
+ goto out;
+ }
+
reader = cpu_buffer->reader_page;
/* If there's more to read, return this page */
@@ -1665,6 +1693,7 @@ ring_buffer_peek(struct ring_buffer *buffer, int cpu, u64 *ts)
struct ring_buffer_per_cpu *cpu_buffer;
struct ring_buffer_event *event;
struct buffer_page *reader;
+ int nr_loops = 0;
if (!cpu_isset(cpu, buffer->cpumask))
return NULL;
@@ -1672,6 +1701,19 @@ ring_buffer_peek(struct ring_buffer *buffer, int cpu, u64 *ts)
cpu_buffer = buffer->buffers[cpu];
again:
+ /*
+ * We repeat when a timestamp is encountered. It is possible
+ * to get multiple timestamps from an interrupt entering just
+ * as one timestamp is about to be written. The max times
+ * that this can happen is the number of nested interrupts we
+ * can have. Nesting 10 deep of interrupts is clearly
+ * an anomaly.
+ */
+ if (unlikely(++nr_loops > 10)) {
+ RB_WARN_ON(cpu_buffer, 1);
+ return NULL;
+ }
+
reader = rb_get_reader_page(cpu_buffer);
if (!reader)
return NULL;
@@ -1722,6 +1764,7 @@ ring_buffer_iter_peek(struct ring_buffer_iter *iter, u64 *ts)
struct ring_buffer *buffer;
struct ring_buffer_per_cpu *cpu_buffer;
struct ring_buffer_event *event;
+ int nr_loops = 0;
if (ring_buffer_iter_empty(iter))
return NULL;
@@ -1730,6 +1773,19 @@ ring_buffer_iter_peek(struct ring_buffer_iter *iter, u64 *ts)
buffer = cpu_buffer->buffer;
again:
+ /*
+ * We repeat when a timestamp is encountered. It is possible
+ * to get multiple timestamps from an interrupt entering just
+ * as one timestamp is about to be written. The max times
+ * that this can happen is the number of nested interrupts we
+ * can have. Nesting 10 deep of interrupts is clearly
+ * an anomaly.
+ */
+ if (unlikely(++nr_loops > 10)) {
+ RB_WARN_ON(cpu_buffer, 1);
+ return NULL;
+ }
+
if (rb_per_cpu_empty(cpu_buffer))
return NULL;