linux-kernel - [patch 4/7] tick/sched: Reduce seqcount held scope in tick_do_update

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: <20201117132006.462195901@linutronix.de>
Date:   Tue, 17 Nov 2020 14:19:46 +0100
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
        Yunfeng Ye <yeyunfeng@...wei.com>
Subject: [patch 4/7] tick/sched: Reduce seqcount held scope in
 tick_do_update_jiffies64()

If jiffies are up to date already (caller lost the race against another
CPU) there is no point to change the sequence count. Doing that just forces
other CPUs into the seqcount retry loop in tick_nohz_next_event() for
nothing.

Just bail out early.

Reported-by: Yunfeng Ye <yeyunfeng@...wei.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
---
 kernel/time/tick-sched.c |   53 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)

--- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
+++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
@@ -86,38 +86,35 @@ static void tick_do_update_jiffies64(kti
 
 	/* Reevaluate with jiffies_lock held */
 	raw_spin_lock(&jiffies_lock);
+	if (ktime_before(now, tick_next_period)) {
+		raw_spin_unlock(&jiffies_lock);
+		return;
+	}
+
 	write_seqcount_begin(&jiffies_seq);
 
-	delta = ktime_sub(now, last_jiffies_update);
-	if (delta >= tick_period) {
+	last_jiffies_update = ktime_add(last_jiffies_update, tick_period);
 
-		delta = ktime_sub(delta, tick_period);
-		last_jiffies_update = ktime_add(last_jiffies_update,
-						tick_period);
-
-		/* Slow path for long timeouts */
-		if (unlikely(delta >= tick_period)) {
-			s64 incr = ktime_to_ns(tick_period);
-
-			ticks = ktime_divns(delta, incr);
-
-			last_jiffies_update = ktime_add_ns(last_jiffies_update,
-							   incr * ticks);
-		}
-		do_timer(++ticks);
-
-		/*
-		 * Keep the tick_next_period variable up to date.
-		 * WRITE_ONCE() pairs with the READ_ONCE() in the lockless
-		 * quick check above.
-		 */
-		WRITE_ONCE(tick_next_period,
-			   ktime_add(last_jiffies_update, tick_period));
-	} else {
-		write_seqcount_end(&jiffies_seq);
-		raw_spin_unlock(&jiffies_lock);
-		return;
+	delta = ktime_sub(now, tick_next_period);
+	if (unlikely(delta >= tick_period)) {
+		/* Slow path for long idle sleep times */
+		s64 incr = ktime_to_ns(tick_period);
+
+		ticks = ktime_divns(delta, incr);
+
+		last_jiffies_update = ktime_add_ns(last_jiffies_update,
+						   incr * ticks);
 	}
+
+	do_timer(++ticks);
+
+	/*
+	 * Keep the tick_next_period variable up to date.  WRITE_ONCE()
+	 * pairs with the READ_ONCE() in the lockless quick check above.
+	 */
+	WRITE_ONCE(tick_next_period,
+		   ktime_add(last_jiffies_update, tick_period));
+
 	write_seqcount_end(&jiffies_seq);
 	raw_spin_unlock(&jiffies_lock);
 	update_wall_time();