linux-kernel - Re: [PREEMPT-RT] Oops in rapl_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: <a656186a-1d4c-5e33-c989-367a9d8cc7be@brocade.com>
Date:   Thu, 27 Oct 2016 15:00:32 -0400
From:   "Charles (Chas) Williams" <ciwillia@...cade.com>
To:     Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
CC:     <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <rt@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PREEMPT-RT] Oops in rapl_cpu_prepare()

On 10/25/2016 08:22 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2016-10-21 17:03:56 [-0400], Charles (Chas) Williams wrote:
>> 	[    3.107126] init_rapl_pmus: maxpkg 4
> there! vmware bug. It probably worked by chance.

Yes, the behavior is a bit random.

> I assume "init_rapl_pmus: maxpkg 4" is from init_rapl_pmus() returning
> topology_max_packages(). So it says 4 but then returns 65535 for CPU 2
> and 3. That -1 comes probably from topology_update_package_map(). Could
> you please send a complete boot log and try the following patch? This
> one should fix your boot problem and disable RAPL if the info is
> invalid.

But sometimes the topology info is correct and if I get lucky, the
package id could be valid for all the CPU's.  Given the behavior,
I have seen so far it makes me thing the RAPL isn't being emulated.
So even if I did boot onto a "valid" set of cores, would I always be
certain that I will be on those cores?

> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/rapl.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/rapl.c
> index 0a535cea8ff3..f5d85f2853d7 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/rapl.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/rapl.c
> @@ -682,6 +682,15 @@ static int __init init_rapl_pmus(void)
>  {
>  	int maxpkg = topology_max_packages();
>  	size_t size;
> +	unsigned int cpu;
> +
> +	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> +		if (topology_logical_package_id(cpu) >= maxpkg) {
> +			pr_err("rapl pmu error: max package: %u but CPU%d belongs to %u\n",
> +			       maxpkg, cpu, topology_logical_package_id(cpu));
> +			return -EINVAL;
> +		}
> +	}
>
>  	size = sizeof(*rapl_pmus) + maxpkg * sizeof(struct rapl_pmu *);
>  	rapl_pmus = kzalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);

Per your request in your next email:

>One thing I forgot to ask: Could you please check if you get the same
>pkgid reported for cpu 0-3 on a pre-v4.8 kernel? (before the hotplug
>rework).

Our previous kernel was 4.4, and didn't use the logical package id:

         /* check if phys_is is already covered */
         for_each_cpu(i, &rapl_cpu_mask) {
                 if (phys_id == topology_physical_package_id(i))
                         return;