linux-kernel - Re: Unfair qspinlocks on ARM64 without LSE atomics => 3ms delay in interrupt handling

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: <20230428073016.YfrIGGoN@linutronix.de>
Date:   Fri, 28 Apr 2023 09:30:16 +0200
From:   Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To:     Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "Bouska, Zdenek" <zdenek.bouska@...mens.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
        Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Puranjay Mohan <p-mohan@...com>
Subject: Re: Unfair qspinlocks on ARM64 without LSE atomics => 3ms delay in
 interrupt handling

On 2023-04-27 15:45:09 [+0200], Kurt Kanzenbach wrote:
> > Are we aware of other concrete case where it bites? Even with just
> > "normal" contented spin_lock usage?
> 
> Well, some years ago I've observed a similar problem with ARM64
> spinlocks, cpu_relax() and retry loops (in the futex code). It also
> generated latency spikes up to 2-3ms. Back then, it was easily
> reproducible using stress-ng --ptrace 4.

That was fixed by
	https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-kernel/patch/1399528508-2806-1-git-send-email-arjun.kv@samsung.com

if my memory serves me well.

> Thanks,
> Kurt

Sebastian