| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20120127155725.86654035.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 15:57:25 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...yossef.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...era.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>, 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>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>,
Kosaki Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>,
Milton Miller <miltonm@....com>
Subject: Re: [v7 4/8] smp: add func to IPI cpus based on parameter func
On Thu, 26 Jan 2012 12:01:57 +0200
Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...yossef.com> wrote:
> Add the on_each_cpu_cond() function that wraps on_each_cpu_mask()
> and calculates the cpumask of cpus to IPI by calling a function supplied
> as a parameter in order to determine whether to IPI each specific cpu.
>
> The function works around allocation failure of cpumask variable in
> CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK=y by itereating over cpus sending an IPI a
> time via smp_call_function_single().
>
> The function is useful since it allows to seperate the specific
> code that decided in each case whether to IPI a specific cpu for
> a specific request from the common boilerplate code of handling
> creating the mask, handling failures etc.
>
> ...
>
> @@ -153,6 +162,16 @@ static inline int up_smp_call_function(smp_call_func_t func, void *info)
> local_irq_enable(); \
> } \
> } while (0)
> +#define on_each_cpu_cond(cond_func, func, info, wait, gfpflags) \
> + do { \
> + preempt_disable(); \
> + if (cond_func(0, info)) { \
> + local_irq_disable(); \
> + (func)(info); \
> + local_irq_enable(); \
Ordinarily, local_irq_enable() in such a low-level thing is dangerous,
because it can cause horrid bugs when called from local_irq_disable()d
code.
However I think we're OK here because it is a bug to call on_each_cpu()
and friends with local irqs disabled, yes?
Do we have any warnings printks if someone calls the ipi-sending
functions with local interrupts disabled? I didn't see any, but didn't
look very hard.
If my above claims are correct then why does on_each_cpu() use
local_irq_save()? hrm.
> + } \
> + preempt_enable(); \
> + } while (0)
>
> static inline void smp_send_reschedule(int cpu) { }
> #define num_booting_cpus() 1
> diff --git a/kernel/smp.c b/kernel/smp.c
> index a081e6c..fa0912a 100644
> --- a/kernel/smp.c
> +++ b/kernel/smp.c
> @@ -730,3 +730,61 @@ void on_each_cpu_mask(const struct cpumask *mask, smp_call_func_t func,
> put_cpu();
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(on_each_cpu_mask);
> +
> +/*
> + * on_each_cpu_cond(): Call a function on each processor for which
> + * the supplied function cond_func returns true, optionally waiting
> + * for all the required CPUs to finish. This may include the local
> + * processor.
> + * @cond_func: A callback function that is passed a cpu id and
> + * the the info parameter. The function is called
> + * with preemption disabled. The function should
> + * return a blooean value indicating whether to IPI
> + * the specified CPU.
> + * @func: The function to run on all applicable CPUs.
> + * This must be fast and non-blocking.
> + * @info: An arbitrary pointer to pass to both functions.
> + * @wait: If true, wait (atomically) until function has
> + * completed on other CPUs.
> + * @gfpflags: GFP flags to use when allocating the cpumask
> + * used internally by the function.
> + *
> + * The function might sleep if the GFP flags indicates a non
> + * atomic allocation is allowed.
> + *
> + * You must not call this function with disabled interrupts or
> + * from a hardware interrupt handler or from a bottom half handler.
> + */
> +void on_each_cpu_cond(bool (*cond_func)(int cpu, void *info),
> + smp_call_func_t func, void *info, bool wait,
> + gfp_t gfpflags)
bah.
z:/usr/src/linux-3.3-rc1> grep -r gfpflags . | wc -l
78
z:/usr/src/linux-3.3-rc1> grep -r gfp_flags . | wc -l
548
> +{
> + cpumask_var_t cpus;
> + int cpu, ret;
> +
> + might_sleep_if(gfpflags & __GFP_WAIT);
For the zalloc_cpumask_var(), it seems. I expect there are
might_sleep() elsewhere in the memory allocation paths, but putting one
here will detect bugs even if CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK=n.
> + if (likely(zalloc_cpumask_var(&cpus, (gfpflags|__GFP_NOWARN)))) {
> + preempt_disable();
> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> + if (cond_func(cpu, info))
> + cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, cpus);
> + on_each_cpu_mask(cpus, func, info, wait);
> + preempt_enable();
> + free_cpumask_var(cpus);
> + } else {
> + /*
> + * No free cpumask, bother. No matter, we'll
> + * just have to IPI them one by one.
> + */
> + preempt_disable();
> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> + if (cond_func(cpu, info)) {
> + ret = smp_call_function_single(cpu, func,
> + info, wait);
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(!ret);
> + }
> + preempt_enable();
> + }
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(on_each_cpu_cond);
I assume the preempt_disable()s here are to suspend CPU hotplug?
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists