linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: skip delays during SMP initialization similar to Xen

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:	Tue, 12 May 2015 04:03:26 -0400
From:	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:	Jan H. Schönherr <jschoenh@...zon.de>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Anthony Liguori <aliguori@...zon.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@....org>,
	Gang Wei <gang.wei@...el.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: skip delays during SMP initialization similar to Xen

On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 6:23 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:

These numbers do not look right.

> Here's what the boot time looks like on a 120 CPUs system, with the
> patch applied:
>
> [    0.558947] x86: Booting SMP configuration:
> [    0.563375] .... node  #0, CPUs:          #1   #2   #3   #4   #5   #6   #7   #8   #9  #10  #11  #12  #13  #14
> [    0.644851] .... node  #1, CPUs:    #15  #16  #17  #18  #19  #20  #21  #22  #23  #24  #25  #26  #27  #28  #29
> [    0.830474] .... node  #2, CPUs:    #30  #31  #32  #33  #34  #35  #36  #37  #38  #39  #40  #41  #42  #43  #44
> [    1.016357] .... node  #3, CPUs:    #45  #46  #47  #48  #49  #50  #51  #52  #53  #54  #55  #56  #57  #58  #59
> [    1.202342] .... node  #0, CPUs:    #60  #61  #62  #63  #64  #65  #66  #67  #68  #69  #70  #71  #72  #73  #74
> [    1.283864] .... node  #1, CPUs:    #75  #76  #77  #78  #79  #80  #81  #82  #83  #84  #85  #86  #87  #88  #89
> [    1.397131] .... node  #2, CPUs:    #90  #91  #92  #93  #94  #95  #96  #97  #98  #99 #100 #101 #102 #103 #104
> [    1.510417] .... node  #3, CPUs:   #105 #106 #107 #108 #109 #110 #111 #112 #113 #114 #115 #116 #117 #118 #119
> [    1.620967] x86: Booted up 4 nodes, 120 CPUs
> [    1.625928] smpboot: Total of 120 processors activated (672866.16 BogoMIPS)
>
> 1.1 seconds to boot 120 CPUs, 10.8 seconds to hit init, that's an
> entirely reasonable runtime I think.
>
> It was 20+ seconds before that, 10+ seconds for the SMP bootup
> sequence.

(1.625928-0.558947) = 1.07 seconds to online 119 additional cpus.
/119 = .0089662268 each, lets call it 9ms.

Here is my ivb-ex running stock fedora 21's Linux-3.19 (no patch applied):

[    0.404369] x86: Booting SMP configuration:
[    0.409492] .... node  #0, CPUs:          #1
[    0.439900] NMI watchdog: enabled on all CPUs, permanently consumes
one hw-PMU counter.
[    0.450533]    #2   #3   #4   #5   #6   #7   #8   #9  #10  #11  #12  #13  #14
[    0.652409] .... node  #1, CPUs:    #15  #16  #17  #18  #19  #20
#21  #22  #23  #24  #25  #26  #27  #28  #29
[    0.999645] .... node  #2, CPUs:    #30  #31  #32  #33  #34  #35
#36  #37  #38  #39  #40  #41  #42  #43  #44
[    1.346991] .... node  #3, CPUs:    #45  #46  #47  #48  #49  #50
#51  #52  #53  #54  #55  #56  #57  #58  #59
[    1.694171] .... node  #0, CPUs:    #60  #61  #62  #63  #64  #65
#66  #67  #68  #69  #70  #71  #72  #73  #74
[    1.928248] .... node  #1, CPUs:    #75  #76  #77  #78  #79  #80
#81  #82  #83  #84  #85  #86  #87  #88  #89
[    2.198370] .... node  #2, CPUs:    #90  #91  #92  #93  #94  #95
#96  #97  #98  #99 #100 #101 #102 #103 #104
[    2.468574] .... node  #3, CPUs:   #105 #106 #107 #108 #109 #110
#111 #112 #113 #114 #115 #116 #117 #118 #119
[    2.737884] x86: Booted up 4 nodes, 120 CPUs
[    2.743758] smpboot: Total of 120 processors activated (671097.18 BogoMIPS)

(2.743758-0.404369) = 2.339389 for all 119 processors
/119 = .01965873109243697478 - lets call it 19ms each

so this baseline case is 19ms/processor -- which matches above, where
we delete 10ms/processor.
But even at 19ms each, this is totals only 2.3 seconds for all 119 processors.
So I don't understand your reference to 10+ seconds, above.

thanks,
Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center

ps. I wish the BIOS boot time on this box were as fast as Linux:-)
--
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/