From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: "Charles (Chas) Williams" <ciwillia@brocade.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"M. Vefa Bicakci" <m.v.b@runbox.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] perf/x86/intel/rapl: avoid access unallocate memory
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 19:03:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161104180313.wyaheuajevkrf6o7@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e89d4987-5aab-fd6d-2b11-7a4d0eb7f57f@brocade.com>
On 2016-11-04 08:20:37 [-0400], Charles (Chas) Williams wrote:
> The initial CPU boots and is identified:
>
> [ 0.009018] identify_boot_cpu
> [ 0.009174] generic_identify: phys_proc_id is now 0
> ...
> [ 0.009427] identify_cpu: before c ffffffff81ae2680 logical_proc_id 0 c->phys_proc_id 0
> [ 0.009506] identify_cpu: after c ffffffff81ae2680 logical_proc_id 65535 c->phys_proc_id 0
>
> So, this is fine because the APIC hasn't been scanned yet. APIC
> now gets scanned:
>
> [ 0.015789] smpboot: APIC(0) Converting physical 0 to logical package 0, cpu 0 (ffff88023fc0a040)
> [ 0.015794] smpboot: APIC(1) Converting physical 1 to logical package 1, cpu 1 (ffff88023fd0a040)
> [ 0.015797] smpboot: Max logical packages: 2
where is the APICID here is comming from?
> So, at this point, I think everything is correct. But now the secondary
> CPU's "boot":
>
> [ 0.236569] identify_secondary_cpu
> [ 0.236620] generic_identify: phys_proc_id is now 2
so here is where fun starts. Xen has also
arch/x86/xen/smp.c::cpu_bringup() where the phys_proc_id is changed. But
isn't done for vmware but it might a place where they duct tape things.
How is this APIC id different from the earlier? I guess based on your
output that generic_identify() changes the content of phys_proc_id.
> [ 0.236745] identify_cpu: before c ffff88023fd0a040 logical_proc_id 65535 c->phys_proc_id 2
> [ 0.236747] identify_cpu: after c ffff88023fd0a040 logical_proc_id 65535 c->phys_proc_id 2
>
> So, APIC discovered I have a cpu 0 and 1 but generic_identify() is called
> my second CPU, 2. This is >= max_physical_pkg_id, so it is going to get
> set to -1.
Now. max_physical_pkg_id is huge. The physical_to_logical_pkg array is
set to -1 on init so slot two has the value -1. That is what you see -
not the -1 because of ">= max_physical_pkg_id".
> The comment at the end of identfy_cpu() says:
>
> /* The boot/hotplug time assigment got cleared, restore it */
>
> So, logical_proc_id being wrong here before restoration doesn't bother
> me since I assume something in booting the secondary CPU's clears any
> existing cpu data.
>
> I know detect_extended_topology() is likely being called for both CPU's
> and getting the right values (checking this now). I don't know why
> generic_identify() is resetting this value.
I don't know either. But it is clearly reading the apic id twice and
second approach is different from the first which leads to different
results. So if you figure out how the first APICID for the second CPU is
retrieved and then you see how it happens for the second time. There
must be a difference.
Sebastian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-04 18:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-02 12:25 [RFC PATCH] perf/x86/intel/rapl: avoid access unallocate memory Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2016-11-02 22:47 ` Charles (Chas) Williams
2016-11-03 17:47 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2016-11-04 12:20 ` Charles (Chas) Williams
2016-11-04 18:03 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2016-11-04 20:42 ` Charles (Chas) Williams
2016-11-04 20:57 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2016-11-07 16:19 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-07 16:59 ` Charles (Chas) Williams
2016-11-07 20:20 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-08 14:20 ` Charles (Chas) Williams
2016-11-08 14:31 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-08 14:57 ` Charles (Chas) Williams
2016-11-08 16:22 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-09 15:35 ` [PATCH] x86/cpuid: Deal with broken firmware once more Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-09 15:37 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-09 16:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-09 16:34 ` Charles (Chas) Williams
2016-11-09 18:37 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-09 18:15 ` Charles (Chas) Williams
2016-11-09 20:27 ` [tip:x86/urgent] x86/cpu: Deal with broken firmware (VMWare/XEN) tip-bot for Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-11 5:49 ` Alok Kataria
2016-11-10 3:57 ` [PATCH] x86/cpuid: Deal with broken firmware once more M. Vefa Bicakci
2016-11-10 10:50 ` Charles (Chas) Williams
2016-11-10 11:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-12 22:05 ` M. Vefa Bicakci
2016-11-10 11:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-10 11:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-10 14:02 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-10 15:05 ` Charles (Chas) Williams
2016-11-10 15:31 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-10 15:54 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2016-11-10 17:15 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-12 22:05 ` M. Vefa Bicakci
2016-11-13 18:04 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-13 23:42 ` M. Vefa Bicakci
2016-11-15 1:21 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-15 1:21 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-18 11:16 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-18 11:16 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-18 14:22 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-18 14:22 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-13 23:42 ` M. Vefa Bicakci
2016-11-13 18:04 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-10 15:12 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-10 15:38 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-10 17:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-10 17:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-10 18:01 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-10 18:01 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-10 15:38 ` Boris Ostrovsky
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20161104180313.wyaheuajevkrf6o7@linutronix.de \
--to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=ciwillia@brocade.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=m.v.b@runbox.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.