[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211001120955.GA965@pathway.suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2021 14:09:55 +0200
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Alexander Popov <alex.popov@...ux.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>, Maciej Rozycki <macro@...am.me.uk>,
Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>, Wei Liu <wl@....org>,
John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@...abs.ru>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
David S Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, notify@...nel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Introduce the pkill_on_warn boot parameter
On Thu 2021-09-30 12:59:03, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Sep 2021 11:15:41 +0200
> Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed 2021-09-29 12:49:24, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 10:01:33PM +0300, Alexander Popov wrote:
> > > > On 29.09.2021 21:58, Alexander Popov wrote:
> > > > > Currently, the Linux kernel provides two types of reaction to kernel
> > > > > warnings:
> > > > > 1. Do nothing (by default),
> > > > > 2. Call panic() if panic_on_warn is set. That's a very strong reaction,
> > > > > so panic_on_warn is usually disabled on production systems.
> >
> > Honestly, I am not sure if panic_on_warn() or the new pkill_on_warn()
> > work as expected. I wonder who uses it in practice and what is
> > the experience.
>
> Several people use it, as I see reports all the time when someone can
> trigger a warn on from user space, and it's listed as a DOS of the
> system.
Good to know.
> > The problem is that many developers do not know about this behavior.
> > They use WARN() when they are lazy to write more useful message or when
> > they want to see all the provided details: task, registry, backtrace.
>
> WARN() Should never be used just because of laziness. If it is, then
> that's a bug. Let's not use that as an excuse to shoot down this
> proposal. WARN() should only be used to test assumptions where you do
> not believe something can happen. I use it all the time when the logic
> prevents some state, and have the WARN() enabled if that state is hit.
> Because to me, it shows something that shouldn't happen happened, and I
> need to fix the code.
I have just double checked code written or reviewed by me and it
mostly follow the rules. But it is partly just by chance. I did not
have these rather clear rules in my head.
But for example, the following older WARN() in format_decode() in
lib/vsprintf.c is questionable:
WARN_ONCE(1, "Please remove unsupported %%%c in format string\n", *fmt);
I guess that the WARN() was used to easily locate the caller. But it
is not a reason the reboot the system or kill the process, definitely.
Maybe, we could implement an alternative macro for these situations,
e.g. DEBUG() or warn().
> > Well, this might be different. Developers might learn this the hard
> > way from bug reports. But there will be bug reports only when
> > anyone really enables this behavior. They will enable it only
> > when it works the right way most of the time.
>
> The panic_on_warn() has been used for years now. I do not think this is
> an issue.
If panic_on_warn() is widely used then pkill_on_warn() is fine as well.
Best Regards,
Petr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
