linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/6] Optimize the cpu hotplug locking -v2

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:	Thu, 10 Oct 2013 20:34:09 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Optimize the cpu hotplug locking -v2

On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 10:48:56AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > Very much agreed; now stop_machine() wouldn't actually work for hotplug
> > > because it will instantly preempt everybody, including someone who might
> > > be in the middle of using per-cpu state of the cpu we're about to
> > > remove.
> > 
> > Well, stop machine doesn't instantly preempt everybody. Only those that
> > don't have preemption disabled. Using per_cpu without preemption
> > disabled can be dangerous.

Can be, but there's more of that around than you want. Also that's not
the entire issue.

> Yes, I'd have thought that the cases where a CPU is fiddling with
> another CPU's percpu data with preemption enabled would be rather rare.

Look at kernel/events/core.c:swevent_hlist_get() it does something like:

  get_online_cpus();
  for_each_online_cpu() {
  	allocate_hash_table();
  }
  put_online_cpus();

Surely you don't want to do that with preemption disabled?

But my point is that even though there aren't many of these today; with
the growing number of cpus in 'commodity' hardware you want to move away
from using preempt_disable() as hotplug lock.
--
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/