linux-kernel - Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [BELATED CORE TOPIC] context tracking / nohz / RCU state

Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Date:	Wed, 12 Aug 2015 11:56:31 +0800
From:	Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>
To:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc:	"ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org" 
	<ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
	Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...hip.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [BELATED CORE TOPIC] context tracking / nohz /
 RCU state

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 1:49 AM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
> This is a bit late, but here goes anyway.
>
> Having played with the x86 context tracking hooks for awhile, I think
> it would be nice if core code that needs to be aware of CPU context
> (kernel, user, idle, guest, etc) could come up with single,
> comprehensible, easily validated set of hooks that arch code is
> supposed to call.
>
> Currently we have:
>
>  - RCU hooks, which come in a wide variety to notify about IRQs, NMIs, etc.
>
>  - Context tracking hooks.  Only used by some arches.  Calling these
> calls the RCU hooks for you in most cases.  They have weird
> interactions with interrupts and they're slow.
>
>  - vtime.  Beats the heck out of me.
>
>  - Whatever deferred things Christoph keeps reminding us about.
>
> Honestly, I don't fully understand what all these hooks are supposed
> to do, nor do I care all that much.  From my perspective, the code
> code should be able to do whatever it wants and rely on appropriate
> notifications from arch code.  It would be great if we could come up
> with something straightforward that covers everything.  For example:
>
> user_mode_to_kernel_mode()
> kernel_mode_to_user_mode()
> kernel_mode_to_guest_mode()
> in_a_periodic_tick()
> starting_nmi()
> ending_nmi()
> may_i_turn_off_ticks_right_now()
> or, better yet:
> i_am_turning_off_ticks_right_now_and_register_your_own_darned_hrtimer_if_thats_a_problem()
>
> Some arches may need:
>
> i_am_lame_and_forgot_my_previous_context()
>
> x86 will soon (4.3 or 4.4, depending on how my syscall cleanup goes)
> no longer need that.
>
> Paul says that some arches need something that goes straight from IRQ
> to user mode (?) -- sigh.
>
> etc.
>
> It might make sense to get enough people who understand what's going
> on behind the scenes together to hash out the requirements.
>

I am also interested by the topic. I hope we can find out a common
infrastructure to handle these callbacks. I am interested in
optimizing/simplifying the these callbacks of RCU as well.

Thanks,
Lai

> --Andy
> _______________________________________________
> Ksummit-discuss mailing list
> Ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-discuss
--
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/

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