From: no-reply@sashiko.virtuozzo.com
To: Vladimir Riabchun <vladimir.riabchun@virtuozzo.com>,
vasileios.almpanis@virtuozzo.com,
Konstantin Khorenko <khorenko@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: devel@openvz.org
Subject: Re: [Devel] [PATCH hci-8.1 v2 3/6] ve/printk: Specify ve in printks
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2026 22:03:31 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <010701a1133e4998-03e159dc-2432-4439-99e5-214c1a4dfa08-000000@eu-central-1.amazonses.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261006-ve-printk-irq-v2-3-db1dc4f6ed07@virtuozzo.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] printk: explicit-VE path skips the in_task() guard, so VE log wakeups can run in softirq
- [Low] printk: stale IRQ comment, trailing whitespace and duplicate struct ve_struct decl
--
commit a71d74a31e0ae4dbd29bc8edddfdbf1bedab2ffe
Author: Vladimir Riabchun <vladimir.riabchun@virtuozzo.com>
ve/printk: Specify ve in printks
This patch adds ve_printk helpers that take an explicit VE pointer. The
ratelimit helpers and the net_ve*_ratelimited macros now require a VE
argument. The conntrack and TCPMSS callers pass net->owner_ve.
Link: https://virtuozzo.atlassian.net/browse/VSTOR-146839
> diff --git a/include/linux/printk.h b/include/linux/printk.h
> --- a/include/linux/printk.h
> +++ b/include/linux/printk.h
[ ... ]
> @@ -76,6 +76,7 @@ extern int console_printk[];
> #define VE0_LOG 1
> #define VE_LOG 2
> #define VE_LOG_BOTH (VE0_LOG | VE_LOG)
> +struct ve_struct;
>
> extern void console_verbose(void);
[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but this adds a second forward declaration of struct
ve_struct. printk.h already has one further down, just before
ve_log_init().
> diff --git a/kernel/printk/printk.c b/kernel/printk/printk.c
> --- a/kernel/printk/printk.c
> +++ b/kernel/printk/printk.c
[ ... ]
> -static asmlinkage int ve_vprintk(int dst, const char *fmt, va_list args)
> +static asmlinkage int ve_vprintk(int dst, struct ve_struct *ve,
> + const char *fmt, va_list args)
> {
> va_list args2;
> - int r = 0;
> + int r = 0, ve_provided = (ve != NULL);
>
> WARN_ON_ONCE(!dst || (dst & ~VE_LOG_BOTH));
>
> + if (!ve)
> + ve = get_exec_env();
> +
> va_copy(args2, args);
> - if (ve_is_super(ve) || (dst & VE0_LOG))
> + if (ve_is_super(ve) || (dst & VE0_LOG))
> r = vprintk(fmt, args);
>
> /* Report IRQ usage here - printing to VE requires explicit ve reference */
> - if ((dst & VE_LOG) && !WARN_ON_ONCE(!in_task()) && !ve_is_super(get_exec_env()))
> - r = ve_vprintk_emit(0, LOGLEVEL_DEFAULT, NULL, fmt, args2);
> + if ((dst & VE_LOG)) {
> + if (!ve_provided && WARN_ON_ONCE(!in_task()))
> + goto done;
> + if (!ve_is_super(ve))
> + r = __ve_vprintk_emit(ve, 0, LOGLEVEL_DEFAULT, NULL, fmt, args2);
> + }
> +done:
> va_end(args2);
[Severity: Medium]
Before this patch, the VE log branch was skipped whenever in_task() was
false. With an explicit VE the in_task() guard is now bypassed.
Can this path now run from softirq or BH-disabled context?
__nf_conntrack_alloc() runs on the packet path. __nf_ct_expect_check()
runs under spin_lock_bh(). Both call net_veboth_ratelimited(net->owner_ve,
...), which expands to the non-deferred __ve_printk():
__nf_conntrack_alloc()
net_veboth_ratelimited(net->owner_ve, ...)
__ve_printk()
ve_vprintk() /* ve_provided is true */
__ve_vprintk_emit(ve, 0, LOGLEVEL_DEFAULT, ...)
vprintk_emit_log(__ve_log_state(ve), ...)
wake_up_interruptible(&log->wait)
LOGLEVEL_DEFAULT does not clear ft.legacy_direct, so a non-init log goes
through the wake_up_interruptible() path in vprintk_emit_log().
The waitqueue lock is a spinlock_t. That is fine in softirq on non-RT
kernels. Is it also intended to be reachable from these contexts on
PREEMPT_RT, and from any future explicit-VE caller running in hardirq or
under a raw_spinlock_t?
The commit message only justifies the explicit VE for the deferred
helpers ("This is true for ve_printk_deferred functions, and their
users"). Yet net_velog_ratelimited() and net_veboth_ratelimited() use the
non-deferred __ve_printk().
Also, ve_printk_ratelimited() in printk.h still falls back to ve0 when
!in_task(). So the two ratelimited paths now follow different rules.
[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but the comment "Report IRQ usage here - printing to VE
requires explicit ve reference" was kept in both ve_vprintk() and
ve_vprintk_deferred(). The in_task() check now only applies when no VE
was passed, so the comment no longer matches the code.
[ ... ]
> +static asmlinkage int ve_vprintk_deferred(int dst, struct ve_struct *ve,
> + const char *fmt, va_list args)
[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but this line adds trailing whitespace after
"struct ve_struct *ve, ".
[ ... ]
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.vzint.dev/#/patchset/20261006-ve-printk-irq-v2-0-db1dc4f6ed07@virtuozzo.com?part=3
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@openvz.org
https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-06 22:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-06 21:53 [Devel] [PATCH hci-8.1 v2 0/6] ve/printk: Fix logs leakage via ve_printk called from IRQ context Vladimir Riabchun
2026-10-06 21:53 ` [Devel] [PATCH hci-8.1 v2 1/6] ve/printk: Add sanity checks in ve_printk functions Vladimir Riabchun
2026-10-06 21:58 ` no-reply
2026-10-11 20:58 ` Vladimir Riabchun
2026-10-06 21:53 ` [Devel] [PATCH hci-8.1 v2 2/6] ve/printk: Report potentially leaking usage of " Vladimir Riabchun
2026-10-06 21:59 ` no-reply
2026-10-11 21:18 ` Vladimir Riabchun
2026-10-06 21:53 ` [Devel] [PATCH hci-8.1 v2 3/6] ve/printk: Specify ve in printks Vladimir Riabchun
2026-10-06 22:03 ` no-reply [this message]
2026-10-11 21:35 ` Vladimir Riabchun
2026-10-06 21:53 ` [Devel] [PATCH hci-8.1 v2 4/6] ve/printk: Fix time virtualization Vladimir Riabchun
2026-10-06 22:04 ` no-reply
2026-10-11 22:38 ` Vladimir Riabchun
2026-10-06 21:53 ` [Devel] [PATCH hci-8.1 v2 5/6] ve/failcount: Use ve_printk with specified ve Vladimir Riabchun
2026-10-06 22:04 ` no-reply
2026-10-06 21:53 ` [Devel] [PATCH hci-8.1 v2 6/6] ve: add neigh_tbl failcounter Vladimir Riabchun
2026-10-06 22:06 ` no-reply
2026-10-11 22:45 ` Vladimir Riabchun
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=010701a1133e4998-03e159dc-2432-4439-99e5-214c1a4dfa08-000000@eu-central-1.amazonses.com \
--to=no-reply@sashiko.virtuozzo.com \
--cc=devel@openvz.org \
--cc=khorenko@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=vasileios.almpanis@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=vladimir.riabchun@virtuozzo.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox