linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 02/18] x86/resctrl: Access per-rmid structures by index

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]

Date:   Thu, 2 Feb 2023 15:44:35 -0800
From:   Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
To:     James Morse <james.morse@....com>, <x86@...nel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        H Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
        Babu Moger <Babu.Moger@....com>,
        <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>,
        D Scott Phillips OS <scott@...amperecomputing.com>,
        <carl@...amperecomputing.com>, <lcherian@...vell.com>,
        <bobo.shaobowang@...wei.com>, <tan.shaopeng@...itsu.com>,
        <xingxin.hx@...nanolis.org>, <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        Jamie Iles <quic_jiles@...cinc.com>,
        Xin Hao <xhao@...ux.alibaba.com>, <peternewman@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/18] x86/resctrl: Access per-rmid structures by index

Hi James,

On 1/13/2023 9:54 AM, James Morse wrote:
> Because of the differences between Intel RDT/AMD QoS and Arm's MPAM
> monitors, RMID values on arm64 are not unique unless the CLOSID is
> also included. Bitmaps like rmid_busy_llc need to be sized by the
> number of unique entries for this resource.
> 
> Add helpers to encode/decode the CLOSID and RMID to an index. The
> domain's busy_rmid_llc and the rmid_ptrs[] array are then sized by

busy_rmid_llc -> rmid_busy_llc ?

Could you please also mention the MBM state impacted?

> index. On x86, this is always just the RMID. This gives resctrl a
> unique value it can use to store monitor values, and allows MPAM to
> decode the closid when reading the hardware counters.
> 
> Tested-by: Shaopeng Tan <tan.shaopeng@...itsu.com>
> Signed-off-by: James Morse <james.morse@....com>
> ---
> Changes since v1:
>  * Added X86_BAD_CLOSID macro to make it clear what this value means
>  * Added second WARN_ON() for closid checking, and made both _ONCE()
> ---
>  arch/x86/include/asm/resctrl.h         | 24 ++++++++
>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/internal.h |  2 +
>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/monitor.c  | 79 +++++++++++++++++---------
>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c |  7 ++-
>  4 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/resctrl.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/resctrl.h
> index 52788f79786f..44d568f3577c 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/resctrl.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/resctrl.h
> @@ -7,6 +7,13 @@
>  #include <linux/sched.h>
>  #include <linux/jump_label.h>
>  
> +/*
> + * This value can never be a valid CLOSID, and is used when mapping a
> + * (closid, rmid) pair to an index and back. On x86 only the RMID is
> + * needed.
> + */
> +#define X86_RESCTRL_BAD_CLOSID		~0

Should this be moved to previous patch where first usage of ~0 appears?

Also, not having a size creates opportunity for inconsistencies. How
about ((u32)~0) ?

> +
>  /**
>   * struct resctrl_pqr_state - State cache for the PQR MSR
>   * @cur_rmid:		The cached Resource Monitoring ID
> @@ -94,6 +101,23 @@ static inline void resctrl_sched_in(void)
>  		__resctrl_sched_in();
>  }
>  
> +static inline u32 resctrl_arch_system_num_rmid_idx(void)
> +{
> +	/* RMID are independent numbers for x86. num_rmid_idx==num_rmid */
> +	return boot_cpu_data.x86_cache_max_rmid + 1;
> +}

It seems that this helper and its subsequent usage eliminates the
need for struct rdt_resource::num_rmid? Are any users left?

Reinette