linux-kernel - [PATCH 5.15 270/917] workqueue: make sysfs of unbound kworker cpumask more clever

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: <20211115165437.931344761@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Mon, 15 Nov 2021 17:56:05 +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, Mengen Sun <mengensun@...cent.com>,
        Menglong Dong <imagedong@...cent.com>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5.15 270/917] workqueue: make sysfs of unbound kworker cpumask more clever

From: Menglong Dong <imagedong@...cent.com>

[ Upstream commit d25302e46592c97d29f70ccb1be558df31a9a360 ]

Some unfriendly component, such as dpdk, write the same mask to
unbound kworker cpumask again and again. Every time it write to
this interface some work is queue to cpu, even though the mask
is same with the original mask.

So, fix it by return success and do nothing if the cpumask is
equal with the old one.

Signed-off-by: Mengen Sun <mengensun@...cent.com>
Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong <imagedong@...cent.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
---
 kernel/workqueue.c | 15 +++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 1b3eb1e9531f4..76988f39ed5ac 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -5384,9 +5384,6 @@ int workqueue_set_unbound_cpumask(cpumask_var_t cpumask)
 	int ret = -EINVAL;
 	cpumask_var_t saved_cpumask;
 
-	if (!zalloc_cpumask_var(&saved_cpumask, GFP_KERNEL))
-		return -ENOMEM;
-
 	/*
 	 * Not excluding isolated cpus on purpose.
 	 * If the user wishes to include them, we allow that.
@@ -5394,6 +5391,15 @@ int workqueue_set_unbound_cpumask(cpumask_var_t cpumask)
 	cpumask_and(cpumask, cpumask, cpu_possible_mask);
 	if (!cpumask_empty(cpumask)) {
 		apply_wqattrs_lock();
+		if (cpumask_equal(cpumask, wq_unbound_cpumask)) {
+			ret = 0;
+			goto out_unlock;
+		}
+
+		if (!zalloc_cpumask_var(&saved_cpumask, GFP_KERNEL)) {
+			ret = -ENOMEM;
+			goto out_unlock;
+		}
 
 		/* save the old wq_unbound_cpumask. */
 		cpumask_copy(saved_cpumask, wq_unbound_cpumask);
@@ -5406,10 +5412,11 @@ int workqueue_set_unbound_cpumask(cpumask_var_t cpumask)
 		if (ret < 0)
 			cpumask_copy(wq_unbound_cpumask, saved_cpumask);
 
+		free_cpumask_var(saved_cpumask);
+out_unlock:
 		apply_wqattrs_unlock();
 	}
 
-	free_cpumask_var(saved_cpumask);
 	return ret;
 }
 
-- 
2.33.0