linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 12/23] thermal: intel: hfi: Convert table

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: <YzLgVckjbAAfC7jg@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Tue, 27 Sep 2022 13:36:53 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri@...el.com>,
        "Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
        Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Tim C . Chen" <tim.c.chen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 12/23] thermal: intel: hfi: Convert table_lock to use
 flags-handling variants

On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 01:34:07PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 04:11:54PM -0700, Ricardo Neri wrote:
> 
> > --- a/drivers/thermal/intel/intel_hfi.c
> > +++ b/drivers/thermal/intel/intel_hfi.c
> > @@ -175,9 +175,10 @@ static struct workqueue_struct *hfi_updates_wq;
> >  static void get_hfi_caps(struct hfi_instance *hfi_instance,
> >  			 struct thermal_genl_cpu_caps *cpu_caps)
> >  {
> > +	unsigned long flags;
> >  	int cpu, i = 0;
> >  
> > -	raw_spin_lock_irq(&hfi_instance->table_lock);
> > +	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&hfi_instance->table_lock, flags);
> >  	for_each_cpu(cpu, hfi_instance->cpus) {
> >  		struct hfi_cpu_data *caps;
> >  		s16 index;
> 
> ^^^^ Anti-pattern alert!
> 
> Now your IRQ latency depends on nr_cpus -- which is a fair fail. The
> existing code is already pretty crap in that it has the preemption
> latency depend on nr_cpus.
> 
> While I'm here looking at the HFI stuff, did they fix that HFI interrupt
> broadcast mess already? Sending an interrupt to *all* CPUs is quite
> insane.

Anyway; given the existence of this here loop; why not have something
like:

DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, hfi_ipc_class);

	class = // extract from HFI mess
	WRITE_ONCE(per_cpu(hfi_ipc_class, cpu), class);

And then have the tick use this_cpu_read(hfi_ipc_class)? No extra
locking required.