[PATCH 2/4] printk: store instead of processing cont parts

[Sergey Senozhatsky]

On (20/07/21 08:40), Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 7:42 AM Sergey Senozhatsky
> <sergey.senozhatsky at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > OK, so basically, extending printk_caller_id() so that for IRQ/NMI
> > we will have more info than just "0x80000000 + raw_smp_processor_id()".
> 
> I think it's really preempt_count() that we want to have there.
> 
> That has the softirq/hardirq/NMI information in it.
> 
> So the "context" identifier of an incomplete write would be { task,
> cpu, preempt_count() } of the writer. If a new KERN_CONT writer comes
> in, it would have to match in that context to actually combine.
> 
> You can probably play "hide the bits" tricks to not *ac tually* use
> three words for it. The task structure in particular tends to be very
> aligned, you could hide bits in the low bits there. The CPU number
> would fit in there, for example.

The purpose of callerid has changed. We used to keep it _only_ in
struct printk_log and never used it for anything but

	if (cont.owner == current && (lflags & LOG_CONT))
		...

so it was easy to use task_struct pointers - we only cared if cont.owner
matches current and never dereferenced the cont.owner pointer.

But we do show caller id to users now (CONFIG_PRINTK_CALLER), so it
makes sense to keep there something more or less human readable, it
helps syzkaller/fuzzer people. That's why we keep PID in [30,0] bits
of callerid if the printk was called in_task(), and CPU_ID otherwise.

Replacing easy to understand PID/CPU_ID with some magic hex, e.g.
hash(current) >> shift or hash(smp_processor_id()) >> shift, will
make things less convenient, so I think it is reasonable to preserve
the existing scheme.

I like what John suggests:

- if printk was called from in_task(), then we keep PID in [30,0] bits
- otherwise we keep smp_processor_id() in [27,0] bits and in the upper
  bits we keep the IRQ/NMI/etc flags.

It may make sense to "promote" u32 callerid to u64, just in case if
someone sometime in the future will have boxes with more than several
billion PIDs.

	-ss