linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] genirq/cpuhotplug: retry with online CPUs on irq_do_set

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: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 03:02:11 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Dongli Zhang <dongli.zhang@...cle.com>
Cc: virtualization@...ts.linux.dev, joe.jin@...cle.com,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] genirq/cpuhotplug: retry with online CPUs on
 irq_do_set_affinity failure

On Mon, Apr 22 2024 at 16:09, Dongli Zhang wrote:
> On 4/22/24 13:58, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 18 2024 at 18:33, Dongli Zhang wrote:
> Would you mind suggesting if the below commit message is fine to you?
>
>
> genirq/cpuhotplug: retry with cpu_online_mask when irq_do_set_affinity return
> -ENOSPC
>
> When a CPU goes offline, the interrupts pinned to that CPU are
> re-configured.
>
> Its managed interrupts undergo either migration to other CPUs or shutdown
> if all CPUs listed in the affinity are offline. This patch doesn't affect
> managed interrupts.
>
> For regular interrupts, they are migrated to other selected online CPUs.
> The target CPUs are chosen from either desc->pending_mask (suppose
> CONFIG_GENERIC_PENDING_IRQ) or d->common->affinity (suppose CONFIG_SMP).
> The cpu_online_mask is used as target CPUs only when CPUs in both
> desc->pending_mask and d->common->affinity are offline.
>
> However, there is a bad corner case, when desc->pending_mask or
> d->common->affinity is selected as the target cpumask, but none of their
> CPUs has any available vectors.

Up to here it's fine.

> As a result, an -ENOSPC error happens:
>
>   "IRQ151: set affinity failed(-28)."
>
> This is from the debugfs. The allocation fails although other online CPUs
> (except CPU=2) have many free vectors.

The debugfs output is not really providing more information than the
last sentence. It just occupies space :)

> The steps to reproduce the issue are in [1]. The core idea is:
>
> 1. Create a KVM guest with many virtio-net PCI devices, each configured
> with a very large number of queues/vectors.
>
> 2. Set the affinity of all virtio-net interrupts to "2,3".

That makes absolutely no sense at all. :)

But yes, I can see the non-real world problem with that.

> For regular interrupts, if irq_do_set_affinity() returns -ENOSPC, retry it
> with all online CPUs. The issue does not happen for managed interrupts
> because the vectors are always reserved (in cm->managed_map) before the CPU
> offline operation.
>
> [1]
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240419013322.58500-1-dongli.zhang@oracle.com/

The reproduction instructions are just additional information and not
necessarily change log material.

So I'd just say after the above:
> However, there is a bad corner case, when desc->pending_mask or
> d->common->affinity is selected as the target cpumask, but none of their
> CPUs has any available vectors.

   In this case the migration fails and the device interrupt becomes
   stale. This is not any different from the case where the affinity
   mask does not contain any online CPU, but there is no fallback
   operation for this.

   Instead of giving up retry the migration attempt with the online CPU
   mask if the interrupt is not managed as managed interrupts cannot be
   affected by this problem.

Hmm?

> I will change it to a single line.
>
> Would you mind suggesting which is preferred? !cpumask_equal(affinity,
> cpu_online_mask) or (affinity != cpu_online_mask)?

If at all you want !cpumask_subset(cpu_online_mask, affinity), but as
this is a corner case 'affinity != cpu_online_mask' should be good
enough.

Thanks,

        tglx