linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] clocksource: arm_arch_timer: set arch_mem_timer cpumask to cpu_possible

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: <a8979e78-9844-160a-a758-631505924bbd@arm.com>
Date:   Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:25:52 +0100
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>,
        Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] clocksource: arm_arch_timer: set arch_mem_timer
 cpumask to cpu_possible_mask



On 10/07/18 13:21, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2018, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> On 09/07/18 23:09, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> On Mon, 9 Jul 2018, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>>
>>>> Currently, arch_mem_timer cpumask is set to cpu_all_mask which should be
>>>> fine. However, cpu_possible_mask is more accurate and if there are other
>>>> clockevent source in the system which are set to cpu_possible_mask, then
>>>> having cpu_all_mask may result in issue.
>>>>
>>>> E.g. on a platform with arm,sp804 timer with rating 300 and
>>>> cpu_possible_mask and this arch_mem_timer timer with rating 400 and
>>>> cpu_all_mask, tick_check_preferred may choose both preferred as the
>>>> cpumasks are not equal though they must be.
>>>>
>>>> This issue was root caused incorrectly initially and a fix was merged as
>>>> commit 1332a9055801 ("tick: Prefer a lower rating device only if it's CPU
>>>> local device").
>>>
>>> To avoid that in the future we really should fix the decision logic to mask
>>> out the non possible CPUs from the supplied masks.
>>
>> Sure, I can do that. But do you want that as a fix for v4.18 ?
> 
> No, that's for 4.19
> 

Ah OK, I assume you are fine with this patch as fix for v4.18.
>> I think we may need this check at another place in tick_setup_device
>>
>> 213         /*
>> 214          * When the device is not per cpu, pin the interrupt to the
>> 215          * current cpu:
>> 216          */
>> 217         if (!cpumask_equal(newdev->cpumask, cpumask))
>> 218                 irq_set_affinity(newdev->irq, cpumask);
>>
>> Does it make sense trim dev->cpumask when registering the clockevents
>> device itself instead of adding check at place where this cpumask
>> can be used ? So that any future user of those masks need not have to
>> take care of that.
> 
> The problem is you cannot trim it because cpu_all_mask is global and const.
> 

Indeed, again forgot it just a pointer to the global one, duh!

>> Also only few ARM clocksource drivers use cpu_all_mask which could be
>> result of copy-paste, we can even fix them too.
>>
>> arm_arch_timer.c:	clk->cpumask = cpu_all_mask;
>> tegra20_timer.c:	tegra_clockevent.cpumask = cpu_all_mask;
>> timer-atcpit100.c:	.cpumask = cpu_all_mask,
>> timer-keystone.c:	event_dev->cpumask = cpu_all_mask;
>> zevio-timer.c:		timer->clkevt.cpumask	= cpu_all_mask;
> 
> Yes, that makes sense. What we could do is warn, when cpu_all_mask is set
> at registration time and replace the pointer with cpu_possible_mask.
> 

I like this approach than having to bitwise and with cpu_possible_mask
at all the necessary place. I will cook up a patch.
-- 
Regards,
Sudeep