linux-kernel - [PATCH 5.4 206/408] powerpc/pseries: explicitly reschedule during drmem

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: <20201027135504.655837265@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Tue, 27 Oct 2020 14:52:24 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Nathan Lynch <nathanl@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5.4 206/408] powerpc/pseries: explicitly reschedule during drmem_lmb list traversal

From: Nathan Lynch <nathanl@...ux.ibm.com>

[ Upstream commit 9d6792ffe140240ae54c881cc4183f9acc24b4df ]

The drmem lmb list can have hundreds of thousands of entries, and
unfortunately lookups take the form of linear searches. As long as
this is the case, traversals have the potential to monopolize the CPU
and provoke lockup reports, workqueue stalls, and the like unless
they explicitly yield.

Rather than placing cond_resched() calls within various
for_each_drmem_lmb() loop blocks in the code, put it in the iteration
expression of the loop macro itself so users can't omit it.

Introduce a drmem_lmb_next() iteration helper function which calls
cond_resched() at a regular interval during array traversal. Each
iteration of the loop in DLPAR code paths can involve around ten RTAS
calls which can each take up to 250us, so this ensures the check is
performed at worst every few milliseconds.

Fixes: 6c6ea53725b3 ("powerpc/mm: Separate ibm, dynamic-memory data from DT format")
Signed-off-by: Nathan Lynch <nathanl@...ux.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200813151131.2070161-1-nathanl@linux.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
---
 arch/powerpc/include/asm/drmem.h | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/drmem.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/drmem.h
index 28c3d936fdf32..dcd6ac098a6e4 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/drmem.h
+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/drmem.h
@@ -8,6 +8,8 @@
 #ifndef _ASM_POWERPC_LMB_H
 #define _ASM_POWERPC_LMB_H
 
+#include <linux/sched.h>
+
 struct drmem_lmb {
 	u64     base_addr;
 	u32     drc_index;
@@ -26,8 +28,22 @@ struct drmem_lmb_info {
 
 extern struct drmem_lmb_info *drmem_info;
 
+static inline struct drmem_lmb *drmem_lmb_next(struct drmem_lmb *lmb,
+					       const struct drmem_lmb *start)
+{
+	/*
+	 * DLPAR code paths can take several milliseconds per element
+	 * when interacting with firmware. Ensure that we don't
+	 * unfairly monopolize the CPU.
+	 */
+	if (((++lmb - start) % 16) == 0)
+		cond_resched();
+
+	return lmb;
+}
+
 #define for_each_drmem_lmb_in_range(lmb, start, end)		\
-	for ((lmb) = (start); (lmb) < (end); (lmb)++)
+	for ((lmb) = (start); (lmb) < (end); lmb = drmem_lmb_next(lmb, start))
 
 #define for_each_drmem_lmb(lmb)					\
 	for_each_drmem_lmb_in_range((lmb),			\
-- 
2.25.1