linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] lib/group_cpus.c: honor housekeeping config when grouping CPUs

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]

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2024 10:43:14 +0200
From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>, Daniel Wagner <dwagner@...e.de>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>,
 Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
 Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbecker@...e.com>,
 Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
 Sridhar Balaraman <sbalaraman@...allelwireless.com>,
 "brookxu.cn" <brookxu.cn@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] lib/group_cpus.c: honor housekeeping config when
 grouping CPUs

On 7/1/24 09:21, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 01, 2024 at 09:08:32AM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 30, 2024 at 09:39:59PM GMT, Ming Lei wrote:
>>>> Make group_cpus_evenly aware of isolcpus configuration and use the
>>>> housekeeping CPU mask as base for distributing the available CPUs into
>>>> groups.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 11ea68f553e2 ("genirq, sched/isolation: Isolate from handling managed interrupts")
>>>
>>> isolated CPUs are actually handled when figuring out irq effective mask,
>>> so not sure how commit 11ea68f553e2 is wrong, and what is fixed in this
>>> patch from user viewpoint?
>>
>> IO queues are allocated/spread on the isolated CPUs and if there is an
>> thread submitting IOs from an isolated CPU it will cause noise on the
>> isolated CPUs. The question is this a use case you need/want to support?
> 
> I have talked RH Openshift team weeks ago and they have such usage.
> 
> userspace is free to run any application from isolated CPUs via 'taskset
> -c' even though 'isolcpus=' is passed from command line.
> 
> Kernel can not add such new constraint on userspace.
> 
>> We have customers who are complaining that even with isolcpus provided
>> they still see IO noise on the isolated CPUs.
> 
> That is another issue, which has been fixed by the following patch:
> 
> a46c27026da1 blk-mq: don't schedule block kworker on isolated CPUs
> 
Hmm. Just when I thought I understood the issue ...

How is this supposed to work, then, given that I/O can be initiated
from the isolated CPUs?
I would have accepted that we have two scheduling domains, blk-mq is
spread across all cpus, and the blk-mq cpusets are arranged according
to the isolcpu settings.
Then we can initiate I/O from the isolated cpus, and the scheduler
would 'magically' ensure that everything is only run on isolated cpus.

But that patch would completely counteract such a setup, as during
I/O we more often than not will invoke kblockd, which then would cause
cross-talk on non-isolated cpus.

What is the idea here?

Confused,

Hannes
-- 
Dr. Hannes Reinecke                  Kernel Storage Architect
hare@...e.de                                +49 911 74053 688
SUSE Software Solutions GmbH, Frankenstr. 146, 90461 Nürnberg
HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), GF: I. Totev, A. McDonald, W. Knoblich