linux-kernel - RE: [RFC 06/12] genirq: Add per-cpu flow handler with conditional IRQ stats

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: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 13:45:26 +0000
From: Michael Kelley <mhklinux@...look.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, "kys@...rosoft.com"
	<kys@...rosoft.com>, "haiyangz@...rosoft.com" <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
	"wei.liu@...nel.org" <wei.liu@...nel.org>, "decui@...rosoft.com"
	<decui@...rosoft.com>, "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>, "bp@...en8.de"
	<bp@...en8.de>, "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"lpieralisi@...nel.org" <lpieralisi@...nel.org>, "kw@...ux.com"
	<kw@...ux.com>, "robh@...nel.org" <robh@...nel.org>, "bhelgaas@...gle.com"
	<bhelgaas@...gle.com>, "James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com"
	<James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>, "martin.petersen@...cle.com"
	<martin.petersen@...cle.com>, "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
	"linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
CC: "maz@...nel.org" <maz@...nel.org>, "den@...inux.co.jp"
	<den@...inux.co.jp>, "jgowans@...zon.com" <jgowans@...zon.com>,
	"dawei.li@...ngroup.cn" <dawei.li@...ngroup.cn>
Subject: RE: [RFC 06/12] genirq: Add per-cpu flow handler with conditional IRQ
 stats

From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2024 6:20 AM
> 
> On Tue, Jun 04 2024 at 23:03, Michael Kelley wrote:
> > From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 11:14 AM
> >>    1) Move the inner workings of handle_percpu_irq() out into
> >>       a static function which returns the 'handled' value and
> >>       share it between the two handler functions.
> >
> > The "inner workings" aren't quite the same in the two cases.
> > handle_percpu_irq() uses handle_irq_event_percpu() while
> > handle_percpu_demux_irq() uses __handle_irq_event_percpu().
> > The latter doesn't do add_interrupt_randomness() because the
> > demultiplexed IRQ handler will do it.  Doing add_interrupt_randomness()
> > twice doesn't break anything, but it's more overhead in the hard irq
> > path, which I'm trying to avoid.  The extra functionality in the
> > non-double-underscore version could be hoisted up to
> > handle_percpu_irq(), but that offsets gains from sharing the
> > inner workings.
> 
> That's not rocket science to solve:
> 
> static irqreturn_t helper(desc, func)
> {
> 	boiler_plate..
>         ret = func(desc)
> 	boiler_plate..
>         return ret;
> }
> 
> No?
> 
> TBH, I still hate that conditional accounting :)
> 
> >>    2) Allocate a proper interrupt for the management mode and invoke it
> >>       via generic_handle_irq() just as any other demultiplex interrupt.
> >>       That spares all the special casing in the core code and just
> >>       works.
> >
> > Yes, this would work on x86, as the top-level interrupt isn't a Linux IRQ,
> > and the interrupt counting is done in Hyper-V specific code that could be
> > removed.  The demux'ed interrupt does the counting.
> >
> > But on arm64 the top-level interrupt *is* a Linux IRQ, so each
> > interrupt will get double-counted, which is a problem.
> 
> What is the problem?
> 
> You have: toplevel, mgmt, device[], right?
> 
> They are all accounted for seperately and each toplevel interrupt might
> result in demultiplexing one or more interrupts (mgmt, device[]), no?
> 
> IMO accounting the toplevel interrupt seperately is informative because
> it allows you to figure out whether demultiplexing is clustered or not,
> but I lost that argument long ago. That's why most demultiplex muck
> installs a chained handler, which is a design fail on it's own.

In /proc/interrupts, the double-counting isn't a problem, and is
potentially helpful as you say. But /proc/stat, for example, shows a total
interrupt count, which will be roughly double what it was before. That
/proc/stat value then shows up in user space in vmstat, for example.
That's what I was concerned about, though it's not a huge problem in
the grand scheme of things.

Michael