linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched/topology: Expose numa

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]

Date:   Fri, 31 Aug 2018 14:05:22 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
        Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@....ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched/topology: Expose numa_mask set/clear functions
 to arch

On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 04:53:50AM -0700, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> [2018-08-31 13:26:39]:
> 
> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 01:12:53PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > NAK, not until you've fixed every cpu_to_node() user in the kernel to
> > > deal with that mask changing.
> > 
> > Also, what happens if userspace reads that information; uses libnuma and
> > then you go and shift the world underneath their feet?
> > 
> > > This is absolutely insane.
> > 
> 
> The topology events are suppose to be very rare.
> From whatever small experiments I have done till now, unless tasks are
> bound to both cpu and memory, they seem to be coping well with topology
> updates. I know things weren't optimal after a topology change but they
> worked. Now after 051f3ca02e46 "Introduce NUMA identity node sched
> domain", systems stall. I am only exploring at ways to keep them working
> as much as they were before that commit.

I'm saying things were fundamentally buggered and this just made it show.

If you cannot guarantee cpu:node relations, you do not have NUMA, end of
story.