linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] genirq: reduce irqdebug bouncing cachelines

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: <87tuoax79f.ffs@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date:   Tue, 13 Apr 2021 22:24:28 +0200
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Cédric Le Goater <clg@...d.org>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] genirq: reduce irqdebug bouncing cachelines

On Tue, Apr 13 2021 at 14:16, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>>> We could test irq_settings_no_debug() directly under handle_nested_irq() 
>>> and handle_irq_event_percpu() to avoid calling note_interrupt(), just 
>>> like we do for noirqdebug.
>> 
>> We can do that, but then we should not just make it:
>> 
>>    if (!irqnodebug && !irq_settings_no_debug(desc))
>>    	note_interrupt(...);
>> 
>> Instead have only one condition:
>> 
>>    if (!irq_settings_no_debug(desc))
>>    	note_interrupt(...);
>> 
>> See the uncompiled delta patch below.
>
> I merged this second part with the first and gave IRQF_NO_DEBUG a try 
> on P8 and P9 systems and all looked fine. I should send both patches 
> after IRQF_NO_AUTOEN is merged in mainline.     

Does having that NODEBUG flag set on the IPI irqs make a measurable
difference or is it just too small to matter?

Thanks,

        tglx