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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Thu, 17 Jun 2021 09:51:54 +0200
From:   Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>
To:     Ley Foon Tan <lftan.linux@...il.com>
Cc:     Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: sched: Question about big and little cores system with SMP and
 EAS

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 01:00:12PM +0800, Ley Foon Tan wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 9:20 PM Dietmar Eggemann
> <dietmar.eggemann@....com> wrote:
> >
> > - Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>
> > + Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>
> >
> > On 16/06/2021 13:39, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 07:29:26PM +0800, Ley Foon Tan wrote:
> > >> Hi all
> > >>
> > >> Would like to ask the experts here regarding the Symmetric
> > >> Multi-Processing mode (SMP) with Energy aware scheduler (EAS) support
> > >> on the big + little cores system.
> > >
> > > And the you ask a question unrelated to either Symmetric MP or EAS :-)
> > >
> > >> Hardware system:
> > >> Big and little cores have almost the same ISA, but the big core has
> > >> some extension instructions that little core doesn't have.
> > >
> > > That problem is unrelated to big.Little / EAS, also by definition that
> > > is not SMP seeing how the 'S' is a blatant lie.
> > >
> > > The simplest solution is to simply disallow usage of the extended ISA
> > > and force mandate the common subset. The complicated answer is something
> > > along the lines of:
> > >
> > >   https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210608180313.11502-1-will@kernel.org
> >
> > We don't encourage asymmetric ISA extensions for EAS*/CAS** on
> > big.Little systems.
> > It would be simply a nightmare to schedule tasks on such systems.
> >
> > The exception to this is the 'asymmetric 32-bit Soc' to support 32bit
> > legacy Apps. The nightmare for scheduling is reduced in this case to CPU
> > affinity, something the task scheduler has to live with already today.
> > (+ DL admission control for 32bit tasks).
> >
> > *  Documentation/scheduler/sched-energy.rst
> > ** Documentation/scheduler/sched-capacity.rst
> 
> Thanks for the reply.
> Yes, forsee it is very complicated and nightmare for software to
> support for SMP mode but HW is not real "symmetric".
> That's why post the question here to ask the advice and comment from
> experts here. So that can feedback to HW team.
> Asymmetric extension instructions issue should more complicated than
> asymmetric 32-bit app support, it can happen in all the areas (kernel,
> app, library and etc).

Indeed. Detecting what extensions a task might use difficult, if not
impossible. Also, we certainly don't want to end up in situation where
the CPU subsets supporting two extensions are disjoint and a task
requires both extensions.

Morten

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ