[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180623184755.GH18979@romley-ivt3.sc.intel.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2018 11:47:55 -0700
From: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/16] x86/split_lock: Enable #AC exception for split
locked accesses
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 12:13:37AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 03:00:03PM -0700, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> > For example, on a consolidated real-time machine, some cores are running
>
> > Another example, in a public cloud deployed in the field, a user process
>
> In either case a single split-lock shouldn't be a real problem, if you
> program the event with a count of 1 and have the NMI handler kill the
> offending task, you should be good.
>
> Not saying the #AC isn't nicer, just saying the PMU based thing can
> still work.
The difference between perf event and #AC for split lock is perf event
is after the fact while #AC is before the fact.
In the examples (esp. the first example), hard real time cannot afforrd
a split lock/bus lock. Perf captures the event and kill the task; but
the split lock has been issued and harm has been done. #AC for split lock
kills the task before the task generates split lock or bus lock to hurt
real time tasks.
Thanks.
-Fenghua
Powered by blists - more mailing lists