linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Introduce serialized smp_call

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <dca2d74b4078a0c2488cefd9beeaeb819a5c7fc9.camel@scylladb.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 00:23:27 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...lladb.com>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, Peter Oskolkov
	 <posk@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, 
 "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Boqun Feng
 <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Andrew Hunter <ahh@...gle.com>,  Maged Michael
 <maged.michael@...il.com>, gromer@...gle.com, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
 <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,  Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, Michael
 Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, Linus Torvalds
 <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Introduce serialized smp_call_function APIs

On Wed, 2024-03-13 at 18:06 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> On 2024-03-13 17:14, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > On Wed, 2024-03-13 at 16:56 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > > commit 944d5fe50f3f ("sched/membarrier: reduce the ability to
> > > hammer 
> > > on sys_membarrier")
> > > introduces a mutex over all membarrier operations to reduce its
> > > ability
> > > to slow down the rest of the system.
> > > 
> > > This RFC series has two objectives:
> > > 
> > > 1) Move this mutex to the smp_call_function APIs so other system
> > > calls
> > >    using smp_call_function IPIs are limited in the same way,
> > > 
> > > 2) Restore scalability of MEMBARRIER_CMD_PRIVATE_EXPEDITED_RSEQ
> > > with
> > >    MEMBARRIER_CMD_FLAG_CPU, which targets specific CPUs with
> > > IPIs.
> > >    This may or may not be useful, and I would welcome benchmarks
> > > from
> > >    users of this feature to figure out if this is worth it.
> > > 
> > > This series applies on top of v6.8.
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > I see this doesn't restore scaling of
> > MEMBARRIER_CMD_PRIVATE_EXPEDITED, 
> > which I use (and wasn't aware was broken).
> 
> It's mainly a mitigation for IPI Storming: CVE-2024-26602 disclosed


Very interesting.


> as part of [1].
> 
> > 
> > I don't have comments on the patches, but do have ideas on how to
> > work 
> > around the problem in Seastar. So this was a useful heads-up for
> > me.
> 
> Note that if you don't use membarrier private expedited too heavily,
> you should not notice any difference. But nevertheless I would be
> interested to hear about any regression on performance of real
> workloads resulting from commit 944d5fe50f3f.
> 


In fact I did observe the original text of 944d5fe50f3f ("On some
systems, sys_membarrier can be very expensive, causing overall
slowdowns for everything") to be true [1]. So rather than causing
a regression, this commit made me fix a problem.

The smp_call_function_many_cond() in [1] is very likely due to
sys_membarrier, and it's slow since it's running on a virtual machine
without posted interrupt virtualization. Usually we detect virtual
machines and call membarrier() less frequently, but on that instance
(AWS d3en) the detection failed and triggered that IPI storm.

My fix is to just detect if there's a concurrent membarrier running and
fall back to doing something else, I don't think it's generally
applicable.

[1] https://github.com/scylladb/scylladb/issues/17207