| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 17:11:08 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>
CC: Virtualization Mailing List <virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dan Hecht <dhecht@...are.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Akinobu Mita <mita@...aclelinux.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] Change softlockup watchdog to ignore stolen time
Zachary Amsden wrote:
> No, it is not unlikely. 4-way SMP VMs idling exhibit this behavior
> with NO_HZ or NO_IDLE_HZ because they get quiet enough to schedule
> nothing on the APs.
>
> And that can happen on native hardware as well.
That's a separate problem.
>>
>> Also, softlockup.c's use of jiffies seems archaic now. Should it be
>> converted to use timers? Mightn't it report lockups just because there
>> was no timer event?
>>
>
> This looks good to me, as a first order approximation. But on native
> hardware, with NO_HZ, this is just broken to begin with. Perhaps we
> should make SOFTLOCKUP depend on !NO_HZ.
OK, that just means the softlockup should, erm, do something else. I
guess using an explicit timer would work, but I'm not sure if that
defeats the whole purpose. Perhaps there should be a per-cpu disable
flag, which would be set when entering idle?
Something like this...
J
diff -r 3f00aa67786f include/linux/sched.h
--- a/include/linux/sched.h Thu Mar 22 17:03:13 2007 -0700
+++ b/include/linux/sched.h Thu Mar 22 17:09:23 2007 -0700
@@ -232,10 +232,18 @@ extern void scheduler_tick(void);
#ifdef CONFIG_DETECT_SOFTLOCKUP
extern void softlockup_tick(void);
+extern void softlockup_enable(void);
+extern void softlockup_disable(void);
extern void spawn_softlockup_task(void);
extern void touch_softlockup_watchdog(void);
#else
static inline void softlockup_tick(void)
+{
+}
+static inline void softlockup_enable(void)
+{
+}
+static inline void softlockup_disable(void)
{
}
static inline void spawn_softlockup_task(void)
diff -r 3f00aa67786f kernel/softlockup.c
--- a/kernel/softlockup.c Thu Mar 22 17:03:13 2007 -0700
+++ b/kernel/softlockup.c Thu Mar 22 17:09:23 2007 -0700
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long long
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long long, touch_timestamp);
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long long, print_timestamp);
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct task_struct *, watchdog_task);
+static DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, enabled);
static int did_panic = 0;
@@ -41,6 +42,17 @@ void touch_softlockup_watchdog(void)
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(touch_softlockup_watchdog);
+void softlockup_enable(void)
+{
+ touch_softlockup_watchdog();
+ __get_cpu_var(enabled) = 1;
+}
+
+void softlockup_disable(void)
+{
+ __get_cpu_var(enabled) = 0;
+}
+
/*
* This callback runs from the timer interrupt, and checks
* whether the watchdog thread has hung or not:
@@ -51,8 +63,8 @@ void softlockup_tick(void)
unsigned long long touch_timestamp = per_cpu(touch_timestamp, this_cpu);
unsigned long long now;
- /* watchdog task hasn't updated timestamp yet */
- if (touch_timestamp == 0)
+ /* return if not enabled */
+ if (!__get_cpu_var(enabled))
return;
/* report at most once a second */
@@ -95,8 +107,8 @@ static int watchdog(void * __bind_cpu)
sched_setscheduler(current, SCHED_FIFO, ¶m);
current->flags |= PF_NOFREEZE;
- /* initialize timestamp */
- touch_softlockup_watchdog();
+ /* enable on this cpu */
+ softlockup_enable();
/*
* Run briefly once per second to reset the softlockup timestamp.
diff -r 3f00aa67786f kernel/time/tick-sched.c
--- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c Thu Mar 22 17:03:13 2007 -0700
+++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c Thu Mar 22 17:09:23 2007 -0700
@@ -228,6 +228,8 @@ void tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick(void)
ts->idle_tick = ts->sched_timer.expires;
ts->tick_stopped = 1;
ts->idle_jiffies = last_jiffies;
+
+ softlockup_disable();
}
/*
* calculate the expiry time for the next timer wheel
@@ -255,6 +257,7 @@ void tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick(void)
cpu_clear(cpu, nohz_cpu_mask);
}
raise_softirq_irqoff(TIMER_SOFTIRQ);
+
out:
ts->next_jiffies = next_jiffies;
ts->last_jiffies = last_jiffies;
@@ -311,6 +314,8 @@ void tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick(void)
ts->tick_stopped = 0;
hrtimer_cancel(&ts->sched_timer);
ts->sched_timer.expires = ts->idle_tick;
+
+ softlockup_enable();
while (1) {
/* Forward the time to expire in the future */
@@ -355,17 +360,12 @@ static void tick_nohz_handler(struct clo
tick_do_update_jiffies64(now);
/*
- * When we are idle and the tick is stopped, we have to touch
- * the watchdog as we might not schedule for a really long
- * time. This happens on complete idle SMP systems while
- * waiting on the login prompt. We also increment the "start
- * of idle" jiffy stamp so the idle accounting adjustment we
- * do when we go busy again does not account too much ticks.
- */
- if (ts->tick_stopped) {
- touch_softlockup_watchdog();
+ * Increment the "start of idle" jiffy stamp so the idle
+ * accounting adjustment we do when we go busy again does not
+ * account too much ticks.
+ */
+ if (ts->tick_stopped)
ts->idle_jiffies++;
- }
update_process_times(user_mode(regs));
profile_tick(CPU_PROFILING);
@@ -450,17 +450,12 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart tick_sched_t
*/
if (regs) {
/*
- * When we are idle and the tick is stopped, we have to touch
- * the watchdog as we might not schedule for a really long
- * time. This happens on complete idle SMP systems while
- * waiting on the login prompt. We also increment the "start of
- * idle" jiffy stamp so the idle accounting adjustment we do
- * when we go busy again does not account too much ticks.
+ * Increment the "start of idle" jiffy stamp so the
+ * idle accounting adjustment we do when we go busy
+ * again does not account too much ticks.
*/
- if (ts->tick_stopped) {
- touch_softlockup_watchdog();
+ if (ts->tick_stopped)
ts->idle_jiffies++;
- }
/*
* update_process_times() might take tasklist_lock, hence
* drop the base lock. sched-tick hrtimers are per-CPU and
@@ -522,6 +517,7 @@ void tick_cancel_sched_timer(int cpu)
if (ts->sched_timer.base)
hrtimer_cancel(&ts->sched_timer);
ts->tick_stopped = 0;
+ softlockup_enable();
ts->nohz_mode = NOHZ_MODE_INACTIVE;
}
#endif /* HIGH_RES_TIMERS */
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists