linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.18 001/145] rcu: Make expedited GPs handle CPU 0 being offline

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,  7 Sep 2018 23:07:47 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH 4.18 001/145] rcu: Make expedited GPs handle CPU 0 being offline

4.18-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>

commit fcc63543650150629c8a873cbef3578770acecd9 upstream.

Currently, the parallelized initialization of expedited grace periods uses
the workqueue associated with each rcu_node structure's ->grplo field.
This works fine unless that CPU is offline.  This commit therefore uses
the CPU corresponding to the lowest-numbered online CPU, or just queues
the work on WORK_CPU_UNBOUND if there are no online CPUs corresponding
to this rcu_node structure.

Note that this patch uses cpu_is_offline() instead of the usual approach
of checking bits in the rcu_node structure's ->qsmaskinitnext field.  This
is safe because preemption is disabled across both the cpu_is_offline()
check and the call to queue_work_on().

Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
[ paulmck: Disable preemption to close offline race window. ]
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
[ paulmck: Apply Peter Zijlstra feedback on CPU selection. ]
Tested-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

---
 kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h |    9 ++++++++-
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
@@ -472,6 +472,7 @@ retry_ipi:
 static void sync_rcu_exp_select_cpus(struct rcu_state *rsp,
 				     smp_call_func_t func)
 {
+	int cpu;
 	struct rcu_node *rnp;

 	trace_rcu_exp_grace_period(rsp->name, rcu_exp_gp_seq_endval(rsp), TPS("reset"));
@@ -492,7 +493,13 @@ static void sync_rcu_exp_select_cpus(str
 			continue;
 		}
 		INIT_WORK(&rnp->rew.rew_work, sync_rcu_exp_select_node_cpus);
-		queue_work_on(rnp->grplo, rcu_par_gp_wq, &rnp->rew.rew_work);
+		preempt_disable();
+		cpu = cpumask_next(rnp->grplo - 1, cpu_online_mask);
+		/* If all offline, queue the work on an unbound CPU. */
+		if (unlikely(cpu > rnp->grphi))
+			cpu = WORK_CPU_UNBOUND;
+		queue_work_on(cpu, rcu_par_gp_wq, &rnp->rew.rew_work);
+		preempt_enable();
 		rnp->exp_need_flush = true;
 	}