linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] Fix the race between smp_call

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: <27240C0AC20F114CBF8149A2696CBE4A058AAE@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Mon, 19 Mar 2012 00:58:21 +0000
From:	"Liu, Chuansheng" <chuansheng.liu@...el.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
	"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] Fix the race between smp_call_function and CPU booting



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Zijlstra [mailto:peterz@...radead.org]
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 5:49 PM
> To: Liu, Chuansheng
> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; Yanmin Zhang; tglx@...utronix.de
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] Fix the race between smp_call_function and CPU booting
> 
> On Fri, 2012-03-16 at 06:24 +0000, Liu, Chuansheng wrote:
> 
> > Based on your patch, I did a little modification, how do you think of that?
> 
> > --- a/kernel/cpu.c
> > +++ b/kernel/cpu.c
> > @@ -640,8 +640,10 @@ void set_cpu_present(unsigned int cpu, bool
> > present)
> >
> >  void set_cpu_online(unsigned int cpu, bool online)  {
> > -       if (online)
> > +       if (online) {
> >                 cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, to_cpumask(cpu_online_bits));
> > +               cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, to_cpumask(cpu_active_bits));
> > +       }
> >         else
> >                 cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, to_cpumask(cpu_online_bits));
> > }
> 
> I'm thinking this lacks rationale. What was wrong, Why does this fix it.
> If you can't answer that stop tinkering and start thinking.
Your patch advance the setting active bit before online setting, that will cause
an warning error, I just move the setting active bit after setting online setting, it can fix
the warning error, and it can fix the race issue between smp_call_function and CPU booting.

I have tested it by some stress tests.

--
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/