linux-kernel - Re: [REGRESSION] CPUIDLE_FLAG_RCU_IDLE, blk_mq_freeze_queue

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: <20230320092236.GA2196776@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Mon, 20 Mar 2023 10:22:36 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Alexey Klimov <alexey.klimov@...aro.org>
Cc:     draszik@...gle.com, peter.griffin@...aro.org,
        willmcvicker@...gle.com, mingo@...nel.org, ulf.hansson@...aro.org,
        tony@...mide.com, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, axboe@...nel.dk,
        alim.akhtar@...sung.com, regressions@...ts.linux.dev,
        avri.altman@....com, bvanassche@....org, klimova@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION] CPUIDLE_FLAG_RCU_IDLE, blk_mq_freeze_queue_wait()
 and slow-stuck reboots

On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 12:16:06PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> So ARM has a weird 'rule' in that idle state 0 (wfi) should not have
> RCU_IDLE set, while others should have.
> 
> Of the dt_init_idle_driver() users:
> 
>  - cpuidle-arm: arm_enter_idle_state()
>  - cpuidle-big_little: bl_enter_powerdown() does ct_cpuidle_{enter,exit}()
>  - cpuidle-psci: psci_enter_idle_state() uses CPU_PM_CPU_IDLE_ENTER_PARAM_RCU()
>  - cpuidle-qcom-spm: spm_enter_idle_state() uses CPU_PM_CPU_IDLE_ENTER_PARAM()
>  - cpuidle-riscv-sbi: sbi_cpuidle_enter_state() uses CPU_PM_CPU_IDLE_ENTER_*_PARAM()
> 
> All of them start on index 1 and hence should have RCU_IDLE set, but at
> least the arm, qcom-spm and riscv-sbi don't actually appear to abide by
> the rules.
> 
> Fixing that gives me the below; does that help?

FWIW..  I got the meaning of CPU_PM_CPU_IDLE_*'s _RCU thing inverted
last week; they're actually ok as is.

Specifically _RCU wants the @low_level_idle_enter to do
ct_cpuidle_{enter,exit}(). And since the ones I audited didn't in fact
do that, they should not be using the _RCU version.