linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v13 11/32] x86,fs/resctrl: Handle events that can be read from any 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4c59a9c8-fd85-490a-858a-15c24f79eaea@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2025 00:18:13 +0800
From: "Chen, Yu C" <yu.c.chen@...el.com>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
CC: <x86@...nel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<patches@...ts.linux.dev>, Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>,
	"James Morse" <james.morse@....com>, Fenghua Yu <fenghuay@...dia.com>, Dave
 Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>, Peter Newman <peternewman@...gle.com>, Babu
 Moger <babu.moger@....com>, Drew Fustini <dfustini@...libre.com>, "Maciej
 Wieczor-Retman" <maciej.wieczor-retman@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 11/32] x86,fs/resctrl: Handle events that can be read
 from any CPU

On 10/30/2025 11:54 PM, Luck, Tony wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 02:14:27PM +0800, Chen, Yu C wrote:
>> Hi Tony,
>>
>> On 10/30/2025 12:20 AM, Tony Luck wrote:
>>> resctrl assumes that monitor events can only be read from a CPU in the
>>> cpumask_t set of each domain.  This is true for x86 events accessed
>>> with an MSR interface, but may not be true for other access methods such
>>> as MMIO.
>>>
>>> Introduce and use flag mon_evt::any_cpu, settable by architecture, that
>>> indicates there are no restrictions on which CPU can read that event.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> -void resctrl_enable_mon_event(enum resctrl_event_id eventid)
>>> +void resctrl_enable_mon_event(enum resctrl_event_id eventid, bool any_cpu)
>>>    {
>>>    	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(eventid < QOS_FIRST_EVENT || eventid >= QOS_NUM_EVENTS))
>>>    		return;
>>> @@ -984,6 +984,7 @@ void resctrl_enable_mon_event(enum resctrl_event_id eventid)
>>>    		return;
>>>    	}
>>> +	mon_event_all[eventid].any_cpu = any_cpu;
>>>    	mon_event_all[eventid].enabled = true;
>>>    }
>>
>> It seems that cpu_on_correct_domain() was dropped, due to
>> the refactor of __mon_event_count() in patch 0006 means it is no
>> longer needed.  But we still invoke smp_processor_id() in preemptible
>> context in __l3_mon_event_count() before further checkings, which would
>> cause a warning.
>> [ 4266.361951] BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [00000000] code:
>> grep/1603
>> [ 4266.363231] caller is __l3_mon_event_count+0x30/0x2a0
>> [ 4266.364250] Call Trace:
>> [ 4266.364262]  <TASK>
>> [ 4266.364273]  dump_stack_lvl+0x53/0x70
>> [ 4266.364289]  check_preemption_disabled+0xca/0xe0
>> [ 4266.364303]  __l3_mon_event_count+0x30/0x2a0
>> [ 4266.364320]  mon_event_count+0x22/0x90
>> [ 4266.364334]  rdtgroup_mondata_show+0x108/0x390
>> [ 4266.364353]  seq_read_iter+0x10d/0x450
>> [ 4266.364368]  vfs_read+0x215/0x330
>> [ 4266.364386]  ksys_read+0x6b/0xe0
>> [ 4266.364401]  do_syscall_64+0x57/0xd70
> 
> I didn't notice this in my testing. Is this in your region aware
> tree? If you are still using RDT_RESOURCE_L3 then I can see how
> you got this call trace.
> 

Yes, it was tested on the region aware tree.

> Maybe you need to dig cpu_on_correct_domain() back up and apply
> it to __l3_mon_event_count()?
> 

Got it, will do.

Thanks,
Chenyu