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
next prev parent 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