linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpuhotplug: make get_online_cpus() scalability by using percpu counter

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: <4BC31265.4090503@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Mon, 12 Apr 2010 20:30:29 +0800
From:	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Nathan Fontenot <nfont@...tin.ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Sachin Sant <sachinp@...ibm.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Shane Wang <shane.wang@...el.com>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpuhotplug: make get_online_cpus() scalability by
 using percpu counter

Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-04-12 at 17:24 +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>>> On 04/07, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>>>> On 04/07, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>>>>> Old get_online_cpus() is read-preference, I think the goal of this ability
>>>>> is allow get_online_cpus()/put_online_cpus() to be called nested.
>>>> Sure, I understand why you added task_struct->get_online_cpus_nest.
>>>>
>>>>> and use per-task counter for allowing get_online_cpus()/put_online_cpus()
>>>>> to be called nested, I think this deal is absolutely worth.
>>>> As I said, I am not going to argue. I can't justify this tradeoff.
>>> But, I must admit, I'd like to avoid adding the new member to task_struct.
>>>
>>> What do you think about the code below?
>>>
>>> I didn't even try to compile it, just to explain what I mean.
>>>
>>> In short: we have the per-cpu fast counters, plus the slow counter
>>> which is only used when cpu_hotplug_begin() is in progress.
>>>
>>> Oleg.
>>>
>> get_online_cpus() in your code is still read-preference.
>> I wish we quit this ability of get_online_cpus().
> 
> Why?

Because read-preference RWL will cause write site starvation.

A user run the following code will cause cpuhotplug starvation.
(100 processes run sched_setaffinity().)

Lai

#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include <sched.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <stdlib.h>

#define NCPU 4
#define NPROCESS 100

cpu_set_t set;
pid_t target;

void stress_test(void)
{
	int cpu;

	srand((int)target);
	for (;;) {
		cpu = rand() % NCPU;
		CPU_SET(cpu, &set);
		sched_setaffinity(target, sizeof(set), &set);
		CPU_CLR(cpu, &set);
	}
}

int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
	pid_t ret;
	int i;

	target = getpid();
	for (i = 1; i < NPROCESS; i++) {
		ret = fork();
		if (ret < 0)
			break;
		else if (ret)
			target = ret;
		else
			stress_test();
	}

	stress_test();
}



--
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/