linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] sched: adjust when cpu_active and cpuset configurations are updated during cpu on/offlining

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:	Tue, 01 Jun 2010 17:57:26 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	mingo@...e.hu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
	paulus@...ba.org, acme@...hat.com, Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] sched: adjust when cpu_active and cpuset
 configurations are updated during cpu on/offlining

On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 20:56 +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Currently, when a cpu goes down, cpu_active is cleared before
> CPU_DOWN_PREPARE starts and cpuset configuration is updated from a
> default priority cpu notifier.  When a cpu is coming up, it's set
> before CPU_ONLINE but cpuset configuration again is updated from the
> same cpu notifier.
> 
> For cpu notifiers, this presents an inconsistent state.  Threads which
> a CPU_DOWN_PREPARE notifier expects to be bound to the CPU can be
> migrated to other cpus because the cpu is no more inactive.
> 
> Fix it by updating cpu_active in the highest priority cpu notifier and
> cpuset configuration in the second highest when a cpu is coming up.
> Down path is updated similarly.  This guarantees that all other cpu
> notifiers see consistent cpu_active and cpuset configuration.
> 
> This problem is triggered by cmwq.  During CPU_DOWN_PREPARE, hotplug
> callback creates a kthread and kthread_bind()s it to the target cpu,
> and the thread is expected to run on that cpu.

I know we all love notifier lists, but doesn't the below code get lots
more readable if we don't play tricks with notifier priorities and
simply hardcode the few (perf/sched/cpuset) callbacks into the hotplug
paths?

Also, I'm afraid you've now inverted the relation between
cpu_active_mask and parition_sched_domains().

You need to first set/clear the active mask, then rebuild the domain.
But with your patch parition_sched_domains() gets called in the regular
DOWN_PREPARE path, while we only clear active at the very end, which
means we build the wrong domains.


--
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/