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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2024 09:31:08 -0700
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 Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 08:13:23AM -0800, Saurabh Singh Sengar wrote:
> 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
> 
ping