linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: page allocator: Do not drain per-cpu lists via IPI from page allocator context

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20120120084840.GG3143@suse.de>
Date:	Fri, 20 Jan 2012 08:48:40 +0000
From:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
To:	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Milton Miller <miltonm@....com>,
	Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...yossef.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	mszeredi@...ell.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>, gong.chen@...el.com,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>,
	"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
	linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: page allocator: Do not drain per-cpu lists via
 IPI from page allocator context

On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 03:16:58AM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> [Reinstating the original Cc list]
> 
> On 01/19/2012 09:50 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:> 
> 
> > On a different x86-64 machines with an intel-specific MCE, I have
> > also noted that the value of num_online_cpus() can change while
> > stop_machine() is running.
> 
> 
> That is expected and intentional right? Meaning, it is during the
> stop_machine() thing itself that a CPU is actually taken offline.
> And at the same time, it is removed from the cpu_online_mask.
> 

It's intentional sometimes and no others. The machine does halt
sometimes and stays there.

> On Intel boxes, essentially, the following gets executed on the dying
> CPU, as set up by the stop_machine stuff.
> 
> __cpu_disable()
>     native_cpu_disable()
>         cpu_disable_common()
>             remove_cpu_from_maps()
>                 set_cpu_online(cpu, false)
> 			^^^^^^
> So, set_cpu_online will remove this CPU from the cpu_online_mask.
> And all this runs while still under the stop machine context.
> And this is exactly what we want right?
> 

We don't want it to halt in stop_machine forever waiting on acknowledges
that are never received until the NMI handler fires.

> > This is sensitive to timing and part of
> > the problem seems to be due to cmci_rediscover() running without the
> > CPU hotplug mutex held. This is not related to the IPI mess and is
> > unrelated to memory pressure but is just to note that CPU hotplug in
> > general can be fragile in parts.
> > 
> 
> 
> For the cmci_rediscover() part, I feel a simple get/put_online_cpus()
> around it should work.
> 

Yeah, that's the first thing I tried first too. Doesn't work though.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
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/