linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 08/11] x86/tsc: Avoid synchronizing TSCs with multiple CPUs in parallel

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: <3e10b062d74a6727ba4d044614af9be96493887a.camel@infradead.org>
Date:   Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:50:29 +0000
From:   David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        rcu@...r.kernel.org, mimoja@...oja.de, hewenliang4@...wei.com,
        hushiyuan@...wei.com, luolongjun@...wei.com, hejingxian@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/11] x86/tsc: Avoid synchronizing TSCs with multiple
 CPUs in parallel

On Thu, 2021-12-09 at 16:43 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 03:09:35PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/tsc_sync.c b/arch/x86/kernel/tsc_sync.c
> > index 50a4515fe0ad..4ee247d89a49 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/tsc_sync.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/tsc_sync.c
> > @@ -202,6 +202,7 @@ bool tsc_store_and_check_tsc_adjust(bool bootcpu)
> >   * Entry/exit counters that make sure that both CPUs
> >   * run the measurement code at once:
> >   */
> > +static atomic_t tsc_sync_cpu = ATOMIC_INIT(-1);
> >  static atomic_t start_count;
> >  static atomic_t stop_count;
> >  static atomic_t skip_test;
> > @@ -326,6 +327,8 @@ void check_tsc_sync_source(int cpu)
> >  		atomic_set(&test_runs, 1);
> >  	else
> >  		atomic_set(&test_runs, 3);
> > +
> > +	atomic_set(&tsc_sync_cpu, cpu);
> >  retry:
> >  	/*
> >  	 * Wait for the target to start or to skip the test:
> > @@ -407,6 +410,10 @@ void check_tsc_sync_target(void)
> >  	if (unsynchronized_tsc())
> >  		return;
> >  
> > +	/* Wait for this CPU's turn */
> > +	while (atomic_read(&tsc_sync_cpu) != cpu)
> > +		cpu_relax();
> > +
> >  	/*
> >  	 * Store, verify and sanitize the TSC adjust register. If
> >  	 * successful skip the test.
> 
> This new atomic_t seems superfluous, there isn't any actual atomic
> operation used.

That's true; it could just be WRITE_ONCE/READ_ONCE. But the atomic is
fairly much equivalent and does no harm.

I see this one mostly as a placeholder — I'd still prefer to have a
decent 1:many TSC sync or at least a 1:many *check* falling back to 1:1
mode if anything actually needs to be adjusted. And/or just avoid the
TSC sync completely when it's not needed, like on kexec.


Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (5174 bytes)