linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 16/20] sched/idle: Use explicit broadcast oneshot control function

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: <4162206.ldgadmp1aL@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date:	Tue, 28 Apr 2015 15:37:44 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/20] sched/idle: Use explicit broadcast oneshot control function

On Tuesday, April 28, 2015 03:31:54 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 28, 2015 02:37:10 PM Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > Sudeep:
> > >> At-least I observed issue only when I am using hardware broadcast timer.
> > >> It doesn't hang when I am using hrtimer as broadcast timer in which case
> > >> one of the cpu will be not enter deeper idle states that lose timer.
> > >> I will rerun on v4.1-rc1 and post the complete log.
> > >
> > > So the bug here is that cpuidle_enter() enables interrupts, so the
> > > assumption about them being not enabled made by
> > > tick_broadcast_oneshot_control() is actually not valid.
> > >
> > > It looks like we need to acquire the clockevents_lock at least in this
> > > particular case.  Let me see where to put it and I'll send a patch for
> > > testing.
> > 
> > Aha that looks very much like it. Put me on the patch and I'll
> > take it for a spin.
> 
> OK, so something like the below for starters (the _irqsave variant is used to
> avoid adding one more WARN_ON(irqs_disabled()) in there).
> 
> I haven't tested it, but then I can't reproduce the original issue in the
> first place.

Of course, the whole "broadcast" thing could be done from cpuidle_enter()
in the first place, but then we could not avoid the problem with the cpuidle
*callback* enabling interrupts possibly in there anyway (not to mention the
"coupled" stuff).


-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
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/