linux-kernel - Re: sched/isolation: tick_take_do_timer_from_boot() calls smp_call_function

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]

Message-ID: <20240527155739.GB5733@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 27 May 2024 17:57:39 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>,
	Chris von Recklinghausen <crecklin@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: sched/isolation: tick_take_do_timer_from_boot() calls
 smp_call_function_single() with irqs disabled

On 05/27, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>
> On Mon May 27, 2024 at 5:27 AM AEST, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > The more I grep the more I confused.
> >
> > On 05/25, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > >
> > > Right. It does not happen because the kernel starts with jiffies as
> > > clocksource except on S390. The jiffies clocksource is not qualified to
> > > switch over to NOHZ mode for obvious reasons.
> >
> > Not obvious for those who never looked at this code ;)
> >
> > OK, clocksource_jiffies doesn't have CLOCK_SOURCE_VALID_FOR_HRES,
>
> jiffies clocksource requires a timer to run it I suppose.

I meant, this is enough to ensure that clocksource_done_booting() paths should
find another cs, best != curr_clocksource, and call timekeeping_notify().

Nevermind, quite possibly I misread this code.

> > And I still don't understand why we can rely on can_stop_idle_tick() even
> > in tick_nohz_idle_stop_tick().
>
> AFAIKS timer_expires_base would be 0 unless tick_nohz_next_event()
> were called, but that is only called from places that checked
> can_stop_idle_tick() or is already a tick_nohz_full() CPU.

OK, thanks.

So, Frederic, Nicholas, any objections to the trivial change below?

We can cleanup the tick_do_timer_boot_cpu logic on top of it.

Oleg.

--- a/kernel/time/tick-common.c
+++ b/kernel/time/tick-common.c
@@ -178,26 +178,6 @@ void tick_setup_periodic(struct clock_event_device *dev, int broadcast)
 	}
 }
 
-#ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL
-static void giveup_do_timer(void *info)
-{
-	int cpu = *(unsigned int *)info;
-
-	WARN_ON(tick_do_timer_cpu != smp_processor_id());
-
-	tick_do_timer_cpu = cpu;
-}
-
-static void tick_take_do_timer_from_boot(void)
-{
-	int cpu = smp_processor_id();
-	int from = tick_do_timer_boot_cpu;
-
-	if (from >= 0 && from != cpu)
-		smp_call_function_single(from, giveup_do_timer, &cpu, 1);
-}
-#endif
-
 /*
  * Setup the tick device
  */
@@ -231,9 +211,8 @@ static void tick_setup_device(struct tick_device *td,
 
 		} else if (tick_do_timer_boot_cpu != -1 &&
 						!tick_nohz_full_cpu(cpu)) {
-			tick_take_do_timer_from_boot();
 			tick_do_timer_boot_cpu = -1;
-			WARN_ON(READ_ONCE(tick_do_timer_cpu) != cpu);
+			WRITE_ONCE(tick_do_timer_cpu, cpu);
 #endif
 		}