linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tick/nohz: Narrow down noise while setting current task's tick dependency

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: <20200518085758.GK2940@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Mon, 18 May 2020 10:57:58 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>, stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tick/nohz: Narrow down noise while setting current
 task's tick dependency

On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 02:34:29AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> So far setting a tick dependency on any task, including current, used to
> trigger an IPI to all CPUs. That's of course suboptimal but it wasn't
> an issue as long as it was only used by posix-cpu-timers on nohz_full,
> a combo that nobody seemed to use in real life.
> 
> But RCU started to use task tick dependency on current task to fix
> stall issues on callbacks processing. These trigger regular and
> undesired system wide IPIs on nohz_full.
> 
> The fix is very easy while setting a tick dependency on the current
> task, only its CPU needs an IPI.
> 
> Fixes: 6a949b7af82d (rcu: Force on tick when invoking lots of callbacks)
> Reported-by: Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
> Cc: stable@...nel.org
> Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
> ---
>  kernel/time/tick-sched.c | 22 +++++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> index 3e2dc9b8858c..f0199a4ba1ad 100644
> --- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> @@ -351,16 +351,24 @@ void tick_nohz_dep_clear_cpu(int cpu, enum tick_dep_bits bit)
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(tick_nohz_dep_clear_cpu);
>  
>  /*
> - * Set a per-task tick dependency. Posix CPU timers need this in order to elapse
> - * per task timers.
> + * Set a per-task tick dependency. RCU need this. Also posix CPU timers
> + * in order to elapse per task timers.
>   */
>  void tick_nohz_dep_set_task(struct task_struct *tsk, enum tick_dep_bits bit)
>  {
> -	/*
> -	 * We could optimize this with just kicking the target running the task
> -	 * if that noise matters for nohz full users.
> -	 */
> -	tick_nohz_dep_set_all(&tsk->tick_dep_mask, bit);
> +	if (!atomic_fetch_or(BIT(bit), &tsk->tick_dep_mask)) {

So why not simply:

		tick_nohz_full_kick_cpu(task_cpu(tsk)); ?

If it got preempted, the scheduling involved would already have observed
the bit we just set and kept the tick on anyway, same for migration.

Or am I missing something?

> +		if (tsk == current) {
> +			preempt_disable();
> +			tick_nohz_full_kick();
> +			preempt_enable();
> +		} else {
> +			/*
> +			 * Some future tick_nohz_full_kick_task()
> +			 * should optimize this.
> +			 */
> +			tick_nohz_full_kick_all();
> +		}
> +	}