linux-kernel - Re: [tip: sched/core] sched/fair: Multi-LLC select_idle

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: <20230605190746.GX83892@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Mon, 5 Jun 2023 21:07:46 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [tip: sched/core] sched/fair: Multi-LLC select_idle_sibling()

On Mon, Jun 05, 2023 at 05:25:30PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:

> nfortunately it causes 
> regression on my ARM 64bit Exynos5433-based TM2e test board during the 
> CPU hotplug tests. 

Can you elucidate an ARM illiterate on the actual topology of that
machine?


> CPU: 6 PID: 43 Comm: cpuhp/6 Not tainted 6.4.0-rc1+ #13640
> Hardware name: Samsung TM2E board (DT)
> pstate: 000000c5 (nzcv daIF -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--)
> pc : __bitmap_and+0x4c/0x78
> lr : select_idle_cpu+0x64/0x450

Btw, where is lr at? Is that perhaps per_cpu(sd_llc) being NULL  or
something?


> > ---
> >   kernel/sched/fair.c     | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   kernel/sched/features.h |  1 +
> >   2 files changed, 39 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > index 48b6f0c..0172458 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > @@ -7028,6 +7028,38 @@ static int select_idle_cpu(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, bool
> >   }
> >   
> >   /*
> > + * For the multiple-LLC per node case, make sure to try the other LLC's if the
> > + * local LLC comes up empty.
> > + */
> > +static int
> > +select_idle_node(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, int target)
> > +{
> > +	struct sched_domain *parent = sd->parent;
> > +	struct sched_group *sg;
> > +
> > +	/* Make sure to not cross nodes. */
> > +	if (!parent || parent->flags & SD_NUMA)
> > +		return -1;
> > +
> > +	sg = parent->groups;
> > +	do {
> > +		int cpu = cpumask_first(sched_group_span(sg));
> > +		struct sched_domain *sd_child;
> > +
> > +		sd_child = per_cpu(sd_llc, cpu);

IOW, sd_child end up NULL?

> > +		if (sd_child != sd) {
> > +			int i = select_idle_cpu(p, sd_child, test_idle_cores(cpu), cpu);
> > +			if ((unsigned)i < nr_cpumask_bits)
> > +				return i;
> > +		}
> > +
> > +		sg = sg->next;
> > +	} while (sg != parent->groups);
> > +
> > +	return -1;
> > +}