linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sched/arm64: store cpu topology before notify_cpu

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:   Wed, 01 Apr 2020 14:23:33 +0100
From:   Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>
To:     Cheng Jian <cj.chengjian@...wei.com>
Cc:     vpillai@...italocean.com, aaron.lwe@...il.com,
        aubrey.intel@...il.com, aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com,
        fweisbec@...il.com, jdesfossez@...italocean.com,
        joel@...lfernandes.org, joelaf@...gle.com, keescook@...omium.org,
        kerrnel@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        mgorman@...hsingularity.net, mingo@...nel.org,
        naravamudan@...italocean.com, pauld@...hat.com,
        pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com, pbonzini@...hat.com,
        peterz@...radead.org, pjt@...gle.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
        tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        xiexiuqi@...wei.com, huawei.libin@...wei.com, w.f@...wei.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/arm64: store cpu topology before notify_cpu_starting


(+LAKML, +Sudeep)

On Wed, Apr 01 2020, Cheng Jian wrote:
> when SCHED_CORE enabled, sched_cpu_starting() uses thread_sibling as
> SMT_MASK to initialize rq->core, but only after store_cpu_topology(),
> the thread_sibling is ready for use.
>
>       notify_cpu_starting()
>           -> sched_cpu_starting()	# use thread_sibling
>
>       store_cpu_topology(cpu)
>           -> update_siblings_masks	# set thread_sibling
>
> Fix this by doing notify_cpu_starting later, just like x86 do.
>

I haven't been following the sched core stuff closely; can't this
rq->core assignment be done in sched_cpu_activate() instead? We already
look at the cpu_smt_mask() in there, and it is valid (we go through the
entirety of secondary_start_kernel() before getting anywhere near
CPUHP_AP_ACTIVE).

I don't think this breaks anything, but without this dependency in
sched_cpu_starting() then there isn't really a reason for this move.

> Signed-off-by: Cheng Jian <cj.chengjian@...wei.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c | 11 ++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> index 5407bf5d98ac..a427c14e82af 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> @@ -236,13 +236,18 @@ asmlinkage notrace void secondary_start_kernel(void)
>       cpuinfo_store_cpu();
>
>       /*
> -	 * Enable GIC and timers.
> +	 * Store cpu topology before notify_cpu_starting,
> +	 * CPUHP_AP_SCHED_STARTING requires SMT topology
> +	 * been initialized for SCHED_CORE.
>        */
> -	notify_cpu_starting(cpu);
> -
>       store_cpu_topology(cpu);
>       numa_add_cpu(cpu);
>
> +	/*
> +	 * Enable GIC and timers.
> +	 */
> +	notify_cpu_starting(cpu);
> +
>       /*
>        * OK, now it's safe to let the boot CPU continue.  Wait for
>        * the CPU migration code to notice that the CPU is online