linux-kernel - Re: [Patch v2 2/2] x86/tsc: use logical_packages as a better estimation of socket numbers

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: <20230616080231.GZ4253@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Fri, 16 Jun 2023 10:02:31 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     "Zhang, Rui" <rui.zhang@...el.com>
Cc:     "Tang, Feng" <feng.tang@...el.com>,
        "Chen, Tim C" <tim.c.chen@...el.com>,
        "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
        "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "paulmck@...nel.org" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        "Woodhouse, David" <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Patch v2 2/2] x86/tsc: use logical_packages as a better
 estimation of socket numbers

On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 06:53:21AM +0000, Zhang, Rui wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-06-15 at 11:20 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> > So I have at least two machines where I boot with 'possible_cpus=#'
> > because the BIOS MADT is reporting a stupid number of CPUs that
> > aren't
> > actually there.
> 
> Does the MADT report those CPUs as disabled but online capable?
> can you send me a copy of the acpidmp?

Sent privately, it's a bit big.

> I had a patch to parse MADT and count the number of physical packages
> by decoding all the valid APICIDs in MADT.
> I'm wondering if the patch still works on this machine.

I can certainly give it a spin; it has IPMI serial-over-ethernet that
works. Brilliant dev machine.

> > So I think I'm lucky and side-stepped this nonsense, but if someone
> > were
> > to use nr_cpus= for this same purpose, they get screwed over and get
> > the
> > watchdog. Sad day for them I suppose.
> 
> what if using package_count_from_MADT?

So I'm thinking that if you cap possible_mask the actual logical
packages is the right number.

Suppose you have a machine with 8 sockets, but limit possible_mask to
only 1 socket. Then TSC will actually be stable, it doesn't matter you
have 7 idle sockets that are not synchronized.

Then again, perhaps if you limit it to 2 sockets you're still in
trouble, I'm not entirely sure how the TSC sync stuff comes apart on
these large systems.