linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] cpufreq: schedutil: reset sg

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: <20171220143344.o2kjuzvrnfghtjej@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Wed, 20 Dec 2017 15:33:44 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Todd Kjos <tkjos@...roid.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] cpufreq: schedutil: reset sg_cpus's flags at IDLE
 enter

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 11:47:18AM +0000, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> Currently, sg_cpu's flags are set to the value defined by the last call
> of the cpufreq_update_util(); for RT/DL classes this corresponds to the
> SCHED_CPUFREQ_{RT/DL} flags always being set.
> 
> When multiple CPUs share the same frequency domain it might happen that
> a CPU which executed an RT task, right before entering IDLE, has one of
> the SCHED_CPUFREQ_RT_DL flags set, permanently, until it exits IDLE.
> 
> Although such an idle CPU is _going to be_ ignored by the
> sugov_next_freq_shared():
>   1. this kind of "useless RT requests" are ignored only if more then
>      TICK_NSEC have elapsed since the last update
>   2. we can still potentially trigger an already too late switch to
>      MAX, which starts also a new throttling interval
>   3. the internal state machine is not consistent with what the
>      scheduler knows, i.e. the CPU is now actually idle

So I _really_ hate having to clutter the idle path for this shared case
:/

1, can obviously be fixed by short-circuiting the timeout when idle.

2. not sure how if you do 1; anybody doing a switch will go through
   sugov_next_freq_shared() which will poll all relevant CPUs and per 1
   will see its idle, no?

Not sure what that leaves for 3.

> diff --git a/kernel/sched/idle_task.c b/kernel/sched/idle_task.c
> index d518664cce4f..6e8ae2aa7a13 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/idle_task.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/idle_task.c
> @@ -30,6 +30,10 @@ pick_next_task_idle(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf
>  	put_prev_task(rq, prev);
>  	update_idle_core(rq);
>  	schedstat_inc(rq->sched_goidle);
> +
> +	/* kick cpufreq (see the comment in kernel/sched/sched.h). */
> +	cpufreq_update_util(rq, SCHED_CPUFREQ_IDLE);
> +
>  	return rq->idle;
>  }
>  
> -- 
> 2.14.1
>