linux-kernel - Re: 答复: [PATCH] hrtimers: Update new CPU's next event in hrtimers_cpu

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: <5228e7ee-f3d3-05df-2a95-ec64d963073d@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2025 00:45:36 +0800
From: "Wangshaobo (bobo)" <bobo.shaobowang@...wei.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>, "wangxiongfeng (C)"
	<wangxiongfeng2@...wei.com>
CC: "anna-maria@...utronix.de" <anna-maria@...utronix.de>,
	"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Xiexiuqi <xiexiuqi@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: 答复: [PATCH] hrtimers: Update new CPU's next event in hrtimers_cpu_dying()

在 2025/7/9 0:23, Wangshaobo (bobo) 写道:
> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: Frederic Weisbecker [mailto:frederic@...nel.org]
> 发送时间: 2025年7月8日 20:41
> 收件人: wangxiongfeng (C) <wangxiongfeng2@...wei.com>
> 抄送: anna-maria@...utronix.de; tglx@...utronix.de; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; Xiexiuqi <xiexiuqi@...wei.com>; Wangshaobo (bobo) <bobo.shaobowang@...wei.com>
> 主题: Re: [PATCH] hrtimers: Update new CPU's next event in hrtimers_cpu_dying()
> 
> Le Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 06:17:27PM +0800, Xiongfeng Wang a écrit :
>> When testing softirq based hrtimers on an ARM32 board, with high
>> resolution mode and nohz are both inactive, softirq based hrtimers
>> failed to trigger when moved away from an offline CPU. The flowpath is
>> as follows.
>>
>> CPU0				CPU1
>> 				softirq based hrtimers are queued
>> 				offline CPU1
>> 				move hrtimers to CPU0 in hrtimers_cpu_dying()
>> 				send IPI to CPU0 to retrigger next event 'softirq_expires_next' is
>> KTIME_MAX call retrigger_next_event() highres and nohz is
>> inactive,just return 'softirq_expires_next' is not updated hrtimer
>> softirq is never triggered
>>
>> Some softirq based hrtimers are queued on CPU1. Then we offline CPU1.
>> hrtimers_cpu_dying() moves hrtimers from CPU1 to CPU0, and then it
>> send a IPI to CPU0 to let CPU0 call retrigger_next_event(). But high
>> resolution mode and nohz are both inactive. So retrigger_next_event()
>> just returned. 'softirq_expires_next' is never updated and remains
>> KTIME_MAX. So hrtimer softirq is never raised.
>>
>> To fix this issue, we call hrtimer_update_next_event() in
>> hrtimers_cpu_dying() to update 'softirq_expires_next' for the new CPU.
>> It also update hardirq hrtimer's next event, but it should have no bad
>> effect.
>>
>> Fixes: 5c0930ccaad5 ("hrtimers: Push pending hrtimers away from
>> outgoing CPU earlier")
>> Signed-off-by: Xiongfeng Wang <wangxiongfeng2@...wei.com>
>> ---
>>   kernel/time/hrtimer.c | 5 ++++-
>>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/time/hrtimer.c b/kernel/time/hrtimer.c index
>> 30899a8cc52c..ff97eb36c116 100644
>> --- a/kernel/time/hrtimer.c
>> +++ b/kernel/time/hrtimer.c
>> @@ -2298,8 +2298,11 @@ int hrtimers_cpu_dying(unsigned int dying_cpu)
>>   	/*
>>   	 * The migration might have changed the first expiring softirq
>>   	 * timer on this CPU. Update it.
>> +	 * We also need to update 'softirq_expires_next' here, because it will
>> +	 * not be updated in retrigger_next_event() if high resolution mode
>> +	 * and nohz are both inactive.
>>   	 */
>> -	__hrtimer_get_next_event(new_base, HRTIMER_ACTIVE_SOFT);
>> +	hrtimer_update_next_event(new_base);
>>   	/* Tell the other CPU to retrigger the next event */
>>   	smp_call_function_single(ncpu, retrigger_next_event, NULL, 0);
> 
> It seems that a similar problem can happen while enqueueing a timer from an offline CPU (see the call to smp_call_function_single_async()).
> 
> How about this (untested) instead? retrigger_next_event, is not a fast path so we don't care about rare extra cost:
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/time/hrtimer.c b/kernel/time/hrtimer.c index 30899a8cc52c..e8c479329282 100644
> --- a/kernel/time/hrtimer.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/hrtimer.c
> @@ -787,10 +787,10 @@ static void retrigger_next_event(void *arg)
>   	 * of the next expiring timer is enough. The return from the SMP
>   	 * function call will take care of the reprogramming in case the
>   	 * CPU was in a NOHZ idle sleep.
> +	 *
> +	 * In periodic low resolution mode, the next softirq expiration
> +	 * must also be updated.
>   	 */
> -	if (!hrtimer_hres_active(base) && !tick_nohz_active)
> -		return;
> 

Could you explain in detail why this judgment is added? Is it due to 
security issues or efficiency impact?

- Wang ShaoBo

>
> 
> 	raw_spin_lock(&base->lock);
>   	hrtimer_update_base(base);
>   	if (hrtimer_hres_active(base))
> @@ -2295,11 +2295,6 @@ int hrtimers_cpu_dying(unsigned int dying_cpu)
>   				     &new_base->clock_base[i]);
>   	}
>   
> -	/*
> -	 * The migration might have changed the first expiring softirq
> -	 * timer on this CPU. Update it.
> -	 */
> -	__hrtimer_get_next_event(new_base, HRTIMER_ACTIVE_SOFT);
>   	/* Tell the other CPU to retrigger the next event */
>   	smp_call_function_single(ncpu, retrigger_next_event, NULL, 0);
>   
>