linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Resurect proper handling of maxcpus= kernel option

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]

Message-ID: <489B2F0B.7020304@qualcomm.com>
Date:	Thu, 07 Aug 2008 10:21:15 -0700
From:	Max Krasnyansky <maxk@...lcomm.com>
To:	Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
CC:	mingo@...e.hu, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jeff.chua.linux@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Resurect proper handling of maxcpus= kernel option

Li Zefan wrote:
> Max.Krasnyansky@...lcomm.com wrote:
>> From: Max Krasnyansky <maxk@...lcomm.com>
>>
>> For some reason we had redundant parsers registered for maxcpus=. 
>> One in init/main.c and another in arch/x86/smpboot.c
>> So I nuked the one in arch/x86.
>>
>> Also 64-bit kernels used to handle maxcpus= as documented in
>> Documentation/cpu-hotplug.txt. CPUs with 'id > maxcpus' are initialized
>> but not booted. 32-bit version for some reason ignored them even though
>> all the infrastructure for booting them later is there.
>>
>> In the current mainline both 64 and 32 bit versions are broken. I'm
>> too lazy to look through git history but I'm guessing it happened as
>> part of the i386 and x86_64 unification.
>>
>> This patch restores the correct behaviour. I've tested x86_64 version on
>> 4- and 8- way Core2 and 2-way Opteron based machines. Various config
>> combinations SMP, !SMP, CPU_HOTPLUG, !CPU_HOTPLUG.
>> Booted with maxcpus=1 and maxcpus=4, etc. Everything is working as expected.
>>
>> I cannot test 32-bit version (no 32-bit machines here).
>>
> 
> I booted my 2-core x86_32 box with maxcpus=1, and saw cpu1 was offline,
> and then I got softlockup BUG immediately when I onlined cpu1:
> 
> SMP alternatives: switching to SMP code
> CPU 1 irqstacks, hard=c078c000 soft=c076c000
> Booting processor 1/1 ip 6000
> Initializing CPU#1
> Calibrating delay using timer specific routine.. 5600.37 BogoMIPS (lpj=2800188)
> CPU: Trace cache: 12K uops, L1 D cache: 16K
> CPU: L2 cache: 1024K
> CPU: Physical Processor ID: 0
> CPU: Processor Core ID: 1
> Intel machine check architecture supported.
> Intel machine check reporting enabled on CPU#1.
> CPU1: Intel P4/Xeon Extended MCE MSRs (24) available
> CPU1: Thermal monitoring enabled
> CPU1: Intel(R) Pentium(R) D CPU 2.80GHz stepping 04
> checking TSC synchronization [CPU#0 -> CPU#1]: passed.
> Switched to high resolution mode on CPU 1
> BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 216s! [events/0:0]
> Modules linked in: bridge stp llc autofs4 dm_mirror dm_log dm_mod snd_intel8x0 snd_ac97_codec ac97_bus snd_seq_dummy snd_seq_oss snd_seq_midi_event snd_seq snd_seq_device snd_pcm_oss snd_pcm snd_timer snd soundcore r8169 snd_page_alloc sg button sata_sis pata_sis ata_generic libata sd_mod scsi_mod ext3 jbd mbcache uhci_hcd ohci_hcd ehci_hcd [last unloaded: scsi_wait_scan]
> irq event stamp: 156
> hardirqs last  enabled at (155): [<c044407f>] trace_hardirqs_on+0xb/0xd
> hardirqs last disabled at (156): [<c04eee88>] trace_hardirqs_off_thunk+0xc/0x10
> softirqs last  enabled at (152): [<c042c2f3>] __do_softirq+0xe3/0xe9
> softirqs last disabled at (95): [<c04058eb>] do_softirq+0x65/0xb4
> 
> Pid: 0, comm: events/0 Not tainted (2.6.27-rc1 #224)
> EIP: 0060:[<c04088ba>] EFLAGS: 00000246 CPU: 1
> EIP is at mwait_idle+0x3c/0x4a
> EAX: 00000000 EBX: e3e48008 ECX: 00000000 EDX: 00000000
> ESI: 00000000 EDI: 00000000 EBP: e3e48f9c ESP: e3e48f98
>  DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 0000 SS: 0068
> CR0: 8005003b CR2: 00000000 CR3: 00768000 CR4: 000006d0
> DR0: 00000000 DR1: 00000000 DR2: 00000000 DR3: 00000000
> DR6: ffff0ff0 DR7: 00000400
>  [<c0402591>] cpu_idle+0xbf/0xdf
>  [<c05fb737>] start_secondary+0x16b/0x170
>  =======================
> 
> 
> 216s should be the time since the machine booted up.
> 
> 
> (maybe off-topic)
> I never succeed to offline cpu1, it caused the kernel to hang
> whenver I offlined cpu1

This is unrelated to the patch that I sent. In fact looks like the patch
actually worked for you. In the sense that it did the right thing,
initialized cpus but did not boot them.

As far as the soft-lockup goes you might want to try different configs.
ie Disable features you do not need. For example cpusets hotplug path in
the current mainline is unsafe (the patch is in review). Also for me if
ftrace is enabled onlining a cpu causes immediate reboot. So I'd say
start disabling features and see which one cases the problem.

Max
--
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/