linux-kernel - Re: tip.today - scheduler bam boom crash (cpu hotplug)

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: <111f89b9-22e3-5a0f-3469-6f64092521ff@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 27 Feb 2017 17:11:34 +0100
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: tip.today - scheduler bam boom crash (cpu hotplug)



On 27/02/2017 16:59, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> OK, so if !KVM_FEATURE_CLOCKSOURCE_STABLE_BIT nothing is stable, but if
> it is set, TSC might still not be stable, but kvm_clock_read() is.
> 
>> However, if kvmclock is stable, we know that the sched clock is stable.
> Right, so the problem is that we only ever want to allow marking
> unstable -- once its found unstable, for whatever reason, we should
> never allow going stable. The corollary of this proposition is that we
> must start out assuming it will become stable. And to avoid actually
> using unstable TSC we do a 3 state bringup:
> 
>  1) sched_clock_running = 0, __stable_early = 1, __stable = 0
>  2) sched_clock_running = 1 (__stable is effective, iow, we run unstable)
>  3) sched_clock_running = 2 (__stable <- __stable_early)
> 
> 2) happens 'early' but is 'safe'.
> 3) happens 'late', after we've brought up SMP and probed TSC
> 
> Between there, we should have detected the most common TSC wreckage and
> made sure to not then switch to 'stable' at 3.
> 
> Now the problem appears to be that we assume sched_clock will use RDTSC
> (native_sched_clock) while sched_clock is a paravirt op.
> 
> Now, I've not yet figured out the ordering between when we set
> pv_time_ops.sched_clock and when we do the 'normal' TSC init stuff.

I think the ordering is fine:

- pv_time_ops.sched_clock is set here:

	start_kernel (init/main.c line 509)
	  setup_arch
	    kvmclock_init
	      kvm_sched_clock_init

- TSC can be declared unstable only after this:

	start_kernel (init/main.c line 628)
	  late_time_init
	    tsc_init

So by the time the tsc_cs_mark_unstable or mark_tsc_unstable can call
clear_sched_clock_stable, pv_time_ops.sched_clock has been set.

> But it appears to me, we should not be calling
> clear_sched_clock_stable() on TSC bits when we don't end up using
> native_sched_clock().

Yes, this makes sense.

Paolo