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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 2 Jul 2018 17:34:34 +0800
From:   gengdongjiu <gengdongjiu@...wei.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <anna-maria@...utronix.de>, <john.stultz@...aro.org>
CC:     Hangaohuai <hangaohuai@...wei.com>,
        "zhangjianwei (D)" <zhangjianwei8@...wei.com>,
        <yangchuanlong@...wei.com>,
        "Zhangbin (EulerOS)" <zhangbin46@...wei.com>,
        <liupeifeng3@...wei.com>
Subject: hrtimer become inaccurate with RT patch

Hi Thomas/Anna/John,

  Recently I found that the hrtimer become inaccurate when there is a RT
process runs on the same cpu core, and the kernel has applied preempt_rt
patch.
  The Linux kernel version is v4.1.46, and the preempt_rt patch is
patch-4.1.46-rt52.patch.
  I know that in the preempt_rt environment the interrupt handlers no
longer run in interrupt context but in process context, so that RT
process will not be interrupt. But if the hrtimer is also runs in
process context the timer is useless when it's inaccurate. so I want to
consult you whether this is expected behavior? whether is reasonable to move the timer IRQ
handling to a thread?

  Check the patch-4.1.46-rt52.patch will found in function
'hrtimer_interrupt' the modify below:

@@ -1296,7 +1539,10 @@ retry:
 			if (basenow.tv64 < hrtimer_get_softexpires_tv64(timer))
 				break;

-			__run_hrtimer(timer, &basenow);
+			if (!hrtimer_rt_defer(timer))
+				__run_hrtimer(timer, &basenow);
+			else
+				raise = 1;
 		}
 	}
 	/* Reevaluate the clock bases for the next expiry */

@@ -1357,6 +1603,9 @@ retry:
 	tick_program_event(expires_next, 1);
 	printk_once(KERN_WARNING "hrtimer: interrupt took %llu ns\n",
 		    ktime_to_ns(delta));
+out:
+	if (raise)
+		raise_softirq_irqoff(HRTIMER_SOFTIRQ);
 }

I think this is why hrtimer is run as a thread, I tried to set
hrtimer.irqsafe to 1, but the timer still seemed not right. Could anyone
give some advise? Thanks.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ