linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/30] PREEMPT_AUTO: support lazy rescheduling

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]

Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 11:28:34 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To: Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	luto@...nel.org, bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
	hpa@...or.com, mingo@...hat.com, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
	vincent.guittot@...aro.org, willy@...radead.org, mgorman@...e.de,
	jpoimboe@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com, jgross@...e.com,
	andrew.cooper3@...rix.com, bristot@...nel.org,
	mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de,
	anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com, mattst88@...il.com,
	krypton@...ich-teichert.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
	David.Laight@...lab.com, richard@....at, jon.grimm@....com,
	bharata@....com, boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, konrad.wilk@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/30] PREEMPT_AUTO: support lazy rescheduling

On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 07:45:18PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 06:03:28PM -0800, Ankur Arora wrote:
> > 
> > Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org> writes:
> > 
> > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 09:55:24PM -0800, Ankur Arora wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> This series adds a new scheduling model PREEMPT_AUTO, which like
> > >> PREEMPT_DYNAMIC allows dynamic switching between a none/voluntary/full
> > >> preemption model. However, unlike PREEMPT_DYNAMIC, it doesn't depend
> > >> on explicit preemption points for the voluntary models.
> > >>
> > >> The series is based on Thomas' original proposal which he outlined
> > >> in [1], [2] and in his PoC [3].
> > >>
> > >> An earlier RFC version is at [4].
> > >
> > > This uncovered a couple of latent bugs in RCU due to its having been
> > > a good long time since anyone built a !SMP preemptible kernel with
> > > non-preemptible RCU.  I have a couple of fixes queued on -rcu [1], most
> > > likely for the merge window after next, but let me know if you need
> > > them sooner.
> > 
> > Thanks. As you can probably tell, I skipped out on !SMP in my testing.
> > But, the attached diff should tide me over until the fixes are in.
> 
> That was indeed my guess.  ;-)
> 
> > > I am also seeing OOM conditions during rcutorture testing of callback
> > > flooding, but I am still looking into this.
> > 
> > That's on the PREEMPT_AUTO && PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY configuration?
> 
> On two of the PREEMPT_AUTO && PREEMPT_NONE configurations, but only on
> two of them thus far.  I am running a longer test to see if this might
> be just luck.  If not, I look to see what rcutorture scenarios TREE10
> and TRACE01 have in common.

And still TRACE01 and TREE10 are hitting OOMs, still not seeing what
sets them apart.  I also hit a grace-period hang in TREE04, which does
CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY=y along with CONFIG_PREEMPT_AUTO=y.  Something
to dig into more.

I am also getting these from builds that enable KASAN:

vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: mwait_idle+0x13: call to tif_resched.constprop.0() leaves .noinstr.text section
vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: acpi_processor_ffh_cstate_enter+0x36: call to tif_resched.constprop.0() leaves .noinstr.text section
vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: cpu_idle_poll.isra.0+0x18: call to tif_resched.constprop.0() leaves .noinstr.text section
vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: acpi_safe_halt+0x0: call to tif_resched.constprop.0() leaves .noinstr.text section
vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: poll_idle+0x33: call to tif_resched.constprop.0() leaves .noinstr.text section
vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: default_enter_idle+0x18: call to tif_resched.constprop.0() leaves .noinstr.text section

Does tif_resched() need to be marked noinstr or some such?

Tracing got harder to disable, but I beleive that is unrelated to lazy
preemption.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul