| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <Zz9vmuv6JoyYKSwo@agluck-desk3>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2024 09:36:26 -0800
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
Peter Newman <peternewman@...gle.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, x86@...nel.org,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Jamie Iles <quic_jiles@...cinc.com>,
Babu Moger <babu.moger@....com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
"Shaopeng Tan (Fujitsu)" <tan.shaopeng@...itsu.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
patches@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 4/9] x86/resctrl: Compute memory bandwidth for all
supported events
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 07:45:01PM -0800, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Hi Tony,
>
> On 11/13/24 4:17 PM, Tony Luck wrote:
> > Computing the bandwidth for an event is cheap, and only done once
> > per second. Doing so simplifies switching between events and allows
> > choosing different events per ctrl_mon group.
>
> This just reads like some a general statement. There surely can be
> some context, problem and *some* description about how this patch goes
> about addressing the problem?
I've rewritten this in the problem ... solution format.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/monitor.c | 72 ++++++++++++---------------
> > 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/monitor.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/monitor.c
> > index 2176e355e864..da4ae21350c8 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/monitor.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/monitor.c
> > @@ -663,9 +663,12 @@ static int __mon_event_count(u32 closid, u32 rmid, struct rmid_read *rr)
> > */
> > static void mbm_bw_count(u32 closid, u32 rmid, struct rmid_read *rr)
> > {
> > - u32 idx = resctrl_arch_rmid_idx_encode(closid, rmid);
> > - struct mbm_state *m = &rr->d->mbm_local[idx];
> > u64 cur_bw, bytes, cur_bytes;
> > + struct mbm_state *m;
> > +
> > + m = get_mbm_state(rr->d, closid, rmid, rr->evtid);
> > + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!m))
> > + return;
> >
> > cur_bytes = rr->val;
> > bytes = cur_bytes - m->prev_bw_bytes;
> > @@ -826,54 +829,45 @@ static void update_mba_bw(struct rdtgroup *rgrp, struct rdt_mon_domain *dom_mbm)
> > resctrl_arch_update_one(r_mba, dom_mba, closid, CDP_NONE, new_msr_val);
> > }
> >
> > -static void mbm_update(struct rdt_resource *r, struct rdt_mon_domain *d,
> > - u32 closid, u32 rmid)
> > +static void mbm_update_one_event(struct rdt_resource *r, struct rdt_mon_domain *d,
> > + u32 closid, u32 rmid, enum resctrl_event_id evtid)
> > {
> > struct rmid_read rr = {0};
> >
> > rr.r = r;
> > rr.d = d;
> > + rr.evtid = evtid;
> > + rr.arch_mon_ctx = resctrl_arch_mon_ctx_alloc(rr.r, rr.evtid);
> > + if (IS_ERR(rr.arch_mon_ctx)) {
> > + pr_warn_ratelimited("Failed to allocate monitor context: %ld",
> > + PTR_ERR(rr.arch_mon_ctx));
> > + return;
> > + }
> > +
> > + __mon_event_count(closid, rmid, &rr);
> >
> > /*
> > - * This is protected from concurrent reads from user
> > - * as both the user and we hold the global mutex.
> > + * If the software controller is enabled, compute the
> > + * bandwidth for this event id.
> > */
> > - if (is_mbm_total_enabled()) {
> > - rr.evtid = QOS_L3_MBM_TOTAL_EVENT_ID;
> > - rr.val = 0;
> > - rr.arch_mon_ctx = resctrl_arch_mon_ctx_alloc(rr.r, rr.evtid);
> > - if (IS_ERR(rr.arch_mon_ctx)) {
> > - pr_warn_ratelimited("Failed to allocate monitor context: %ld",
> > - PTR_ERR(rr.arch_mon_ctx));
> > - return;
> > - }
> > -
> > - __mon_event_count(closid, rmid, &rr);
> > + if (is_mba_sc(NULL))
> > + mbm_bw_count(closid, rmid, &rr);
> >
> > - resctrl_arch_mon_ctx_free(rr.r, rr.evtid, rr.arch_mon_ctx);
> > - }
> > - if (is_mbm_local_enabled()) {
> > - rr.evtid = QOS_L3_MBM_LOCAL_EVENT_ID;
> > - rr.val = 0;
> > - rr.arch_mon_ctx = resctrl_arch_mon_ctx_alloc(rr.r, rr.evtid);
> > - if (IS_ERR(rr.arch_mon_ctx)) {
> > - pr_warn_ratelimited("Failed to allocate monitor context: %ld",
> > - PTR_ERR(rr.arch_mon_ctx));
> > - return;
> > - }
> > -
> > - __mon_event_count(closid, rmid, &rr);
> > + resctrl_arch_mon_ctx_free(rr.r, rr.evtid, rr.arch_mon_ctx);
> > +}
> >
> > - /*
> > - * Call the MBA software controller only for the
> > - * control groups and when user has enabled
> > - * the software controller explicitly.
> > - */
> > - if (is_mba_sc(NULL))
> > - mbm_bw_count(closid, rmid, &rr);
> > +static void mbm_update(struct rdt_resource *r, struct rdt_mon_domain *d,
> > + u32 closid, u32 rmid)
> > +{
> > + /*
> > + * This is protected from concurrent reads from user
> > + * as both the user and we hold the global mutex.
>
> I understand that you are just copy&pasting a comment here but could you please
> help to avoid any obstacles by removing the code impersonation? Perhaps something like:
>
> * This is protected from concurrent reads from user
> * as both the user and overflow handler hold the global mutex.
>
> (please feel free to improve)
No improvement to the text needed. But I did move some words from 2nd
line to the first to look better (IMHO).
> > + */
> > + if (is_mbm_total_enabled())
> > + mbm_update_one_event(r, d, closid, rmid, QOS_L3_MBM_TOTAL_EVENT_ID);
> >
> > - resctrl_arch_mon_ctx_free(rr.r, rr.evtid, rr.arch_mon_ctx);
> > - }
> > + if (is_mbm_local_enabled())
> > + mbm_update_one_event(r, d, closid, rmid, QOS_L3_MBM_LOCAL_EVENT_ID);
> > }
> >
> > /*
>
> Reinette
-Tony
Powered by blists - more mailing lists