linux-kernel - Re: [patch V2 00/24] cpu/hotplug: Convert get_online_cpus() to a percpu

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: <20170427123056.GD31337@leverpostej>
Date:   Thu, 27 Apr 2017 13:30:57 +0100
From:   Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Sebastian Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@....com>,
        catalin.marinas@....com, will.deacon@....com,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [patch V2 00/24] cpu/hotplug: Convert get_online_cpus() to a
 percpu_rwsem

On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:01:57PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Apr 2017, Mark Rutland wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 10:27:20AM +0200, Sebastian Siewior wrote:
> > > On 2017-04-26 11:32:36 [+0100], Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > > > So we could end up calling static_branch_enable_cpuslocked()
> > > > > without actually holding the lock. Should we do a cpu_hotplug_begin/done in
> > > > > setup_cpu_feature_capabilities ? I agree it doesn't look that nice. Thoughts ?
> > > > 
> > > > I agree that's hideous, but it looks like the only choice given the
> > > > hotplug rwsem cahnges. :/
> > > 
> > > would work for you to provide a locked and unlocked version?
> > 
> > Maybe. Today we have:
> > 
> > // rwsem unlocked
> > start_kernel()
> > ->smp_prepare_boot_cpu()
> > -->update_cpu_errata_workarounds()
> > --->update_cpu_capabilities()
> > 
> > // rwsem locked (by other CPU)
> > secondary_start_kernel()
> > ->check_local_cpu_capabilities()
> > -->update_cpu_errata_workarounds()
> > --->update_cpu_capabilities() 
> > 
> > With the common chain:
> > 
> > update_cpu_capabilities()
> > ->cpus_set_cap()
> > -->static_branch_enable()
> > 
> > ... so we could add a update_cpu_capabilities{,_cpuslocked}(), and say
> > that cpus_set_cap() expects the hotplug rswem to be locked, as per the
> > below diff.
> 
> You just can take the rwsen in smp_prepare_boot_cpu(), so you don't need
> that conditional thingy at all. Hmm?

True.

Given it's a bit further up the callchain, it's probably worth a
comment, but it will work.

I'll spin a v3 to that effect shortly.

Thanks,
Mark.