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: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1803091107520.1364@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date:   Fri, 9 Mar 2018 11:08:54 +0100 (CET)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
cc:     Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        Laurence Oberman <loberman@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online
 CPUs as far as possible

On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 12:20:09AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > Actually, it isn't a real fix, the real one is in the following two:
> > > 
> > > 	0c20244d458e scsi: megaraid_sas: fix selection of reply queue
> > > 	ed6d043be8cd scsi: hpsa: fix selection of reply queue
> > 
> > Where are these commits? Neither Linus tree not -next know anything about
> > them....
> 
> Both aren't merged yet, but they should land V4.16, IMO.
> 
> > 
> > > This patchset can't guarantee that all IRQ vectors are assigned by one
> > > online CPU, for example, in a quad-socket system, if only one processor
> > > is present, then some of vectors are still assigned by all offline CPUs,
> > > and it is a valid case, but still may cause io hang if drivers(hpsa,
> > > megaraid_sas) select reply queue in current way.
> > 
> > So my understanding is that these irq patches are enhancements and not bug
> > fixes. I'll queue them for 4.17 then.
> 
> Wrt. this IO hang issue, these patches shouldn't be bug fix, but they may
> fix performance regression[1] for some systems caused by 84676c1f21 ("genirq/affinity:
> assign vectors to all possible CPUs").
> 
> [1] https://marc.info/?l=linux-block&m=152050347831149&w=2

Hmm. The patches are rather large for urgent and evtl. backporting. Is
there a simpler way to address that performance issue?

Thanks,

	tglx

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ