linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] softirq: wake up ktimer thread in softirq context

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: <BN9PR11MB5370CFD46CA0A2E245AFBE04ECA49@BN9PR11MB5370.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Mon, 20 Feb 2023 08:55:09 +0000
From:   "Chang, Junxiao" <junxiao.chang@...el.com>
To:     Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "rostedt@...dmis.org" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        "Peh, Hock Zhang" <hock.zhang.peh@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] softirq: wake up ktimer thread in softirq context

Thank you for handling this, modified patch looks good to me.

Regards,
Junxiao

-----Original Message-----
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de> 
Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2023 1:30 AM
To: Chang, Junxiao <junxiao.chang@...el.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org; tglx@...utronix.de; rostedt@...dmis.org; Peh, Hock Zhang <hock.zhang.peh@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] softirq: wake up ktimer thread in softirq context

On 2022-12-08 15:56:04 [+0800], Junxiao Chang wrote:
> Occiaionally timer interrupt might be triggered in softirq context, 
> ktimer thread should be woken up with RT kernel, or else ktimer thread 
> might stay in sleep state although timer interrupt has been triggered.
> 
> This change fixes a latency issue that timer handler is delayed for 
> more than 4ms in network related test.

Sorry for keeping you waiting. Your observation and patch is correct. I'm going to apply a slightly modified version of the patch (see below) after I reworded the commit message on Monday.

diff --git a/kernel/softirq.c b/kernel/softirq.c index ab1fe34326bab..82f3e68fbe220 100644
--- a/kernel/softirq.c
+++ b/kernel/softirq.c
@@ -664,13 +664,12 @@ static inline void __irq_exit_rcu(void)  #endif
 	account_hardirq_exit(current);
 	preempt_count_sub(HARDIRQ_OFFSET);
-	if (!in_interrupt()) {
-		if (local_softirq_pending())
-			invoke_softirq();
+	if (!in_interrupt() && local_softirq_pending())
+		invoke_softirq();
 
-		if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) && local_pending_timers())
-			wake_timersd();
-	}
+	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) && local_pending_timers() &&
+	    !(in_nmi() | in_hardirq()))
+		wake_timersd();
 
 	tick_irq_exit();
 }

Sebastian