linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 2/3] CPU hotplug, stop-machine: Plug race-window that leads to "IPI-to-offline-CPU"

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: <537F6B2E.5080907@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Fri, 23 May 2014 21:07:18 +0530
From:	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>, tglx@...utronix.de,
	mingo@...nel.org, tj@...nel.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, hch@...radead.org, mgorman@...e.de,
	riel@...hat.com, bp@...e.de, rostedt@...dmis.org,
	mgalbraith@...e.de, ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, oleg@...hat.com, rjw@...ysocki.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/3] CPU hotplug, stop-machine: Plug race-window that
 leads to "IPI-to-offline-CPU"

On 05/23/2014 09:03 PM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> On 05/23/2014 09:01 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 08:48:07PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
>>> On 05/23/2014 08:42 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 08:15:35PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
>>>>>>> +		 * During CPU offline, we don't want the other CPUs to send
>>>>>>> +		 * IPIs to the active_cpu (the outgoing CPU) *after* it has
>>>>>>> +		 * disabled interrupts (because, then it will notice the IPIs
>>>>>>> +		 * only after it has gone offline). We can prevent this by
>>>>>>> +		 * making the other CPUs disable their interrupts first - that
>>>>>>> +		 * way, they will run the stop-machine code with interrupts
>>>>>>> +		 * disabled, and hence won't send IPIs after that point.
>>>>
>>>> That's complete nonsense, you can send IPIs all you want with interrupts
>>>> disabled.
>>>>
>>>
>>> True, but that's not what the comment says. It says "you can't send IPIs
>>> because you are running the *stop-machine* loop, because the stop-machine loop
>>> doesn't send IPIs itself! The only possibility of sending IPIs from within
>>> stop-machine is if that CPU can takes an interrupt and the *interrupt handler*
>>> sends the IPI (like what the block layer used to do) - and we precisely avoid
>>> that possibility by disabling interrupts. So no IPIs will be sent beyond
>>> this point.
>>
>> but one of those CPUs is running the stop machine function, which calls
>> CPU_DYING which runs all kinds of nonsense and therefore can send IPIs
>> all it wants, right?
>>
> 
> Yes, but that CPU certainly won't IPI itself! (We are trying to avoid getting
> IPIs on precisely that CPU - the one which is about to go offline).
> 

And the comment makes that distinction between the "active-cpu" and "other CPUs"
(where active-cpu is the one which runs the stop-machine function and eventually
goes offline). Thus "other CPUs" won't send IPIs after that point, because they
are running the stop-machine loop with interrupts disabled. This ensures that
the "active-cpu" doesn't get any IPIs - which is what we want.

Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat

--
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/