linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] init/main: Clear boot task idle flag

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: <20230913173238.h6tj4lwsbdxcuswo@revolver>
Date:   Wed, 13 Sep 2023 13:32:38 -0400
From:   "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        maple-tree@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
        Andreas Schwab <schwab@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Peng Zhang <zhangpeng.00@...edance.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        "Mike Rapoport (IBM)" <rppt@...nel.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] init/main: Clear boot task idle flag

* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> [230913 12:13]:
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 10:51:25AM -0400, Liam R. Howlett wrote:
> > * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> [230913 09:53]:
> > > On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 08:56:47PM -0400, Liam R. Howlett wrote:
> > > 
> > > > diff --git a/init/main.c b/init/main.c
> > > > index ad920fac325c..f74772acf612 100644
> > > > --- a/init/main.c
> > > > +++ b/init/main.c
> > > > @@ -696,7 +696,7 @@ noinline void __ref __noreturn rest_init(void)
> > > >  	 */
> > > >  	rcu_read_lock();
> > > >  	tsk = find_task_by_pid_ns(pid, &init_pid_ns);
> > > > -	tsk->flags |= PF_NO_SETAFFINITY;
> > > > +	tsk->flags |= PF_NO_SETAFFINITY | PF_IDLE;
> > > >  	set_cpus_allowed_ptr(tsk, cpumask_of(smp_processor_id()));
> > > >  	rcu_read_unlock();
> > > >  
> > > 
> > > Hmm, isn't that pid-1 you're setting PF_IDLE on?
> > 
> > Yes, thanks.  I think that is what Geert is hitting with my patch.
> > 
> > debug __might_resched() in kernel/sched/core.c is failing to return in
> > that first (complex) if statement.  His report says pid 1 so this is
> > likely the issue.
> > 
> > > 
> > > The task becoming idle is 'current' at this point, see the
> > > cpu_startup_entry() call below.
> > > 
> > > Would not something like so be the right thing?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > > index 2299a5cfbfb9..802551e0009b 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > > @@ -9269,7 +9269,7 @@ void __init init_idle(struct task_struct *idle, int cpu)
> > >  	 * PF_KTHREAD should already be set at this point; regardless, make it
> > >  	 * look like a proper per-CPU kthread.
> > >  	 */
> > > -	idle->flags |= PF_IDLE | PF_KTHREAD | PF_NO_SETAFFINITY;
> > > +	idle->flags |= PF_KTHREAD | PF_NO_SETAFFINITY;
> > 
> > I am concerned this will alter more than just the current task, which
> > would mean more modifications later.  There is a comment about it being
> > called 'more than once' and 'per cpu' so I am hesitant to change the
> > function itself.
> > 
> > Although I am unsure of the call path.. fork_idle() -> init_idle() I
> > guess?
> 
> There's only 2 ways to get into do_idle(), through cpu_startup_entry()
> and play_idle_precise(). The latter already frobs PF_IDLE since it is
> the forced idle path, this then leaves cpu_startup_entry() which is the
> regular idle path.
> 
> All idle threads will end up calling into it, the boot CPU through the
> rest_init() and the SMP cpus through arch SMP bringup.
> 
> IOW, this ensures all idle loops will have PF_IDLE set but not the
> pre-idle loop setup code these threads run.

Thanks for the information.  This does leave the init_idle() function in
the odd state of not setting PF_IDLE, but I guess that's okay?