OpenVZ / Virtuozzo kernel development (devel@openvz.org)
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vladimir Riabchun <vladimir.riabchun@virtuozzo.com>
To: no-reply@sashiko.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: Sun, 11 Oct 2026 23:35:40 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8c4c7700-6b54-4050-854d-1b21c825b9c0@virtuozzo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <010701a1133e4998-03e159dc-2432-4439-99e5-214c1a4dfa08-000000@eu-central-1.amazonses.com>



On 10/7/26 00:03, no-reply@sashiko.virtuozzo.com wrote:
> 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().

True, will remove in v3.

> 
>> 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.

Yes, this is intentional.

> 
> Can this path now run from softirq or BH-disabled context?

It could do it before the patch series as well.

> 
> __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?

I don't want to debug working printk. It works, it used to work.
The only thing I change in the end is rejecting prints to
random containers.

> 
> 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().

Interrupt != scheduler.

> 
> Also, ve_printk_ratelimited() in printk.h still falls back to ve0 when
> !in_task(). So the two ratelimited paths now follow different rules.

net_veboth_ratelimited uses explicit ve, so no rules are needed.
With generic ve_ratelimit we will redirect message to host and drop
a warning. Consistent with the behavior "print to host or drop".

> 
> [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.

True, will drop the comment in v3 since
"!ve_provided && WARN_ON_ONCE(!in_task())" is self-descriptive.

> 
> [ ... ]
> 
>> +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, ".

I was looking for this whitespace for days...

> 
> [ ... ]
> 

-- 
Best regards, Riabchun Vladimir
Linux Kernel Developer, Virtuozzo

_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@openvz.org
https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-11 21:37 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
2026-10-11 21:35     ` Vladimir Riabchun [this message]
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=8c4c7700-6b54-4050-854d-1b21c825b9c0@virtuozzo.com \
    --to=vladimir.riabchun@virtuozzo.com \
    --cc=devel@openvz.org \
    --cc=khorenko@virtuozzo.com \
    --cc=no-reply@sashiko.virtuozzo.com \
    --cc=vasileios.almpanis@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