linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] softirq: implement IRQ flood detection mechanism

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: <2a8bd278-5384-d82f-c09b-4fce236d2d95@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 4 Sep 2019 19:31:48 +0200
From:   Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To:     Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
        Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.com>,
        Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Long Li <longli@...rosoft.com>,
        John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
        Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] softirq: implement IRQ flood detection mechanism

Hi,

On 04/09/2019 19:07, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 9/3/19 12:50 AM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> On 03/09/2019 09:28, Ming Lei wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 08:40:35AM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>>>> It is a scheduler problem then ?
>>>
>>> Scheduler can do nothing if the CPU is taken completely by handling
>>> interrupt & softirq, so seems not a scheduler problem, IMO.
>>
>> Why? If there is a irq pressure on one CPU reducing its capacity, the
>> scheduler will balance the tasks on another CPU, no?
> 
> Only if CONFIG_IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING has been enabled. However, I don't
> know any Linux distro that enables that option. That's probably because
> that option introduces two rdtsc() calls in each interrupt. Given the
> overhead introduced by this option, I don't think this is the solution
> Ming is looking for.

Was this overhead reported somewhere ?

> See also irqtime_account_irq() in kernel/sched/cputime.c.

>From my POV, this framework could be interesting to detect this situation.


-- 
 <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog