linux-kernel - Re: 4.2.2: NR_CPUS effectively being 1 bug

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20151003085232.GA27214@gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 3 Oct 2015 10:52:32 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: 4.2.2: NR_CPUS effectively being 1 bug


* Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 2015-10-03 at 10:18 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Sat, 2015-10-03 at 09:38 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > > * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 02:00:33PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 23:46:59 +0300 Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com> wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > FYI, I've upgraded from 4.1.7 to 4.2.1 (and retested with 4.2.2) and
> > > > > > > everything is scheduled on 1 CPU out of 4 (i5 760).
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 	$ sudo cat /proc/1/status | grep cpu -i
> > > > > > > 	Cpus_allowed:   1
> > > > > > > 	Cpus_allowed_list:      0
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Every process inherits this tiny cpumask.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Sell the other CPUs on ebay?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I haven't seen such a report before - maybe it rings a bell with Peter
> > > > > > & Ingo?
> > > > > 
> > > > > I think this is related to some NO_HZ_FULL quackery. People seem to have
> > > > > enabled stuff they've really no sane reason for.
> > > > 
> > > > So the question is, is CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL_ALL=y enabled? If yes then please disable 
> > > > it.
> > > > 
> > > > Frederic, is there a fix for that? The Kconfig help text for CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL_ALL 
> > > > says::
> > > > 
> > > >  CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL_ALL:
> > > > 
> > > >  If the user doesn't pass the nohz_full boot option to
> > > >  define the range of full dynticks CPUs, consider that all
> > > >  CPUs in the system are full dynticks by default.
> > > >  Note the boot CPU will still be kept outside the range to
> > > >  handle the timekeeping duty.
> > > > 
> > > > I can see people enabling that. Why are all CPUs lost if it's done?
> > > 
> > > Simple.  Rik made it such that cpu_isolated_map is immune to cpusets,
> > > and Chris made tick_nohz_full_mask automatically set cpu_isolated_map,
> > > so now if nohz_full is ever turned on, that CPU is gone from the generic
> > > pool forever, with obvious consequences for CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL_ALL.
> > > 
> > > Lovely eh?
> > 
> > Which commit is that? Needs to be reverted...
> 
> 8cb9764f nohz: Set isolcpus when nohz_full is set
> 
> That's the one that makes them all automatically go away.

Ok, looks like a patch with good intentions but bad effects. Mind sending a revert 
patch, changelogged, signed off?

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/