linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/Kconfig: Allow NR

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2024 08:13:23 -0800
From: Saurabh Singh Sengar <ssengar@...ux.microsoft.com>
To: tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de,
	dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sgeorgejohn@...rosoft.com
Cc: ssengar@...rosoft.com, libo.chen@...cle.com, mhklinux@...look.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/Kconfig: Allow NR_CPUS between 512 and 8192

On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 01:50:13AM -0800, Saurabh Sengar wrote:
> Today there is no way one can choose any value between 512 to 8192
> for NR_CPUS seamlessly. NR_CPUS is guarded by NR_CPUS_RANGE_END which
> is further dependent on CPUMASK_OFFSTACK to allow NR_CPUs > 512.
> 
> For x86, CPUMASK_OFFSTACK can only be enabled either by selecting MAXSMP
> or DEBUG_PER_CPU_MAPS. Both of these options has a cost to pay. MAXSMP
> will increase the NR_CPUS to 8192 which will have impact on kernel image
> size whereas DEBUG_PER_CPU_MAPS will have additional run time overheads.
> Thus there is no good way to have NR_CPUS anything between 512 to 8192.
> 
> Fix this by selecting CPUMASK_OFFSTACK if NR_CPUS > 512 and
> let NR_CPUS_RANGE_END set to 8192.
> 
> On a Hyper-V system where max number of CPUs are only 2048, this
> patch saves around 1 MB of kernel image size, compare to MAXSMP.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Saurabh Sengar <ssengar@...ux.microsoft.com>
> ---
> 
> I want to mention that in ARM and other archs its very simple
> to select any value for NR_CPUS. This is an attempt to have more
> flexibilty in x86 arch as well to choose NR_CPUS.
> 
> Some of the earlier discussions reated to it which could be of interest:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1708092603-14504-1-git-send-email-ssengar@linux.microsoft.com/
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/794a1211-630b-3ee5-55a3-c06f10df1490@linux.com/
> 
> Another approach I can think of is to allow CPUMASK_OFFSTACK to be enabled
> more freely like the below patch of Libo Chen, that will also solve the
> problem I am addressing. But I feel this patch may have impact on other
> archs as well and I am not sure if that is in best interest of all the archs.
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220412231508.32629-2-libo.chen@oracle.com/
> 
>  arch/x86/Kconfig | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> index 07a0c8d4e9c7..458f3f250d7f 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ config X86_64
>  	select SWIOTLB
>  	select ARCH_HAS_ELFCORE_COMPAT
>  	select ZONE_DMA32
> +	select CPUMASK_OFFSTACK if NR_CPUS > 512
>  
>  config FORCE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE
>  	def_bool y
> @@ -1006,8 +1007,7 @@ config NR_CPUS_RANGE_END
>  config NR_CPUS_RANGE_END
>  	int
>  	depends on X86_64
> -	default 8192 if  SMP && CPUMASK_OFFSTACK
> -	default  512 if  SMP && !CPUMASK_OFFSTACK
> +	default 8192 if  SMP
>  	default    1 if !SMP
>  
>  config NR_CPUS_DEFAULT
> 
> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 

x86 Maintainers,

Kind reminder to have your feedback on this patch.

- Saurabh