linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 7/8] mm: Only IPI CPUs to drain local pages if they exist

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: <20120107170506.GA29261@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Sat, 7 Jan 2012 09:05:06 -0800
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
Cc:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>,
	Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...yossef.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...era.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
	Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 7/8] mm: Only IPI CPUs to drain local pages if they
 exist

On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 08:52:01AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 04:17:39PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 02:40:11PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 02:20:17PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> 
> [ . . . ]
> 
> > > I've been chasing that patch and getting no replies what so
> > > ever from folk like Peter, Thomas and Ingo.
> > > 
> > > The problem affects all IPI-raising functions, which mask with
> > > cpu_online_mask directly.
> > 
> > Actually, in one sense I'm glad to hear it because from my brief
> > poking around, I was having trouble understanding why we were always
> > safe from sending IPIs to CPUs in the process of being offlined.
> 
> The trick is to disable preemption (not interrupts!) across the IPI, which
> prevents CPU-hotplug's stop_machine() from running.  You also have to
> have checked that the CPU is online within this same preemption-disabled
> section of code.  This means that the outgoing CPU has to accept IPIs
> even after its CPU_DOWN_PREPARE notifier has been called -- right up
> to the stop_machine() call to take_cpu_down().

Of course, another trick is to hold the CPU-hotplug lock across the IPI,
but this is quite a bit more heavy-weight than disabling preemption.

							Thanx, Paul

--
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/