linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/8] perf, arch: Use early_initcall() for all arch pmu implementations

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 25 Nov 2010 11:25:13 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
	"robert.richter" <robert.richter@....com>,
	Corey Ashford <cjashfor@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	fweisbec <fweisbec@...il.com>, paulus <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
	Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Kyle Moffett <kyle@...fetthome.net>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, davem <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Michael Cree <mcree@...on.net.nz>,
	Deng-Cheng Zhu <dengcheng.zhu@...il.com>,
	paulus <paulus@...ba.org>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
	Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/8] perf, arch: Use early_initcall() for all arch
 pmu implementations

On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 23:17 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> plain text document attachment (perf-fix-hw-init.patch)
> Currently architectures use various random locations to init the PMU
> driver, for some this happens before the perf core code is
> initialized.
> 
> In order to avoid calling perf_pmu_register() before the core code is
> up and running and able to deal with it, move all arch init to at
> least early_initcall (some archs use a later init, which is fine).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
> ---

<snip alpha,sparc bits>

> Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
> +++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
> @@ -1348,7 +1348,7 @@ static void __init pmu_check_apic(void)
>  	pr_info("no hardware sampling interrupt available.\n");
>  }
>  
> -void __init init_hw_perf_events(void)
> +int __init init_hw_perf_events(void)
>  {
>  	struct event_constraint *c;
>  	int err;
> @@ -1363,11 +1363,11 @@ void __init init_hw_perf_events(void)
>  		err = amd_pmu_init();
>  		break;
>  	default:
> -		return;
> +		return 0;
>  	}
>  	if (err != 0) {
>  		pr_cont("no PMU driver, software events only.\n");
> -		return;
> +		return 0;
>  	}
>  
>  	pmu_check_apic();
> @@ -1420,7 +1420,10 @@ void __init init_hw_perf_events(void)
>  
>  	perf_pmu_register(&pmu);
>  	perf_cpu_notifier(x86_pmu_notifier);
> +
> +	return 0;
>  }
> +early_initcall(init_hw_perf_events);
>  
>  static inline void x86_pmu_read(struct perf_event *event)
>  {

Right, so hw perf init happens from (after this patch):

 arch_initcall: powerpc, arm, sh, mips
 early_initcall: x86, sparc, alpha


Now the problem is that the generic watchdog code (kernel/watchdog.c)
tries to create hw perf events, and that too runs from early_initcall.

So my question is, how do we go about curing this, because powerpc, arm,
sh and mips are too late and the rest depends on link order to work, not
really a nice situation.

There's two categories of solutions:
 - move the watchdog later, and
 - move the hw perf init earlier.

The former is undesired because we want the watchdog as early as
possible, the later needs new infrastructure (also, I don't know if the
arch implementations can actually run this early).

So do I create a perf_initcall() or is there another solution that
avoids things like calling the watchdog code from all arch init code?
--
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/