All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Leonid Yegoshin <Leonid.Yegoshin@imgtec.com>
To: James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com>
Cc: <yhb@ruijie.com.cn>, <ralf@linux-mips.org>, <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
Subject: [PATCH] MIPS: We need to clear MMU contexts of all other processes when asid_cache(cpu) wraps to 0.
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 11:19:30 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5783E332.2020503@imgtec.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160711180755.GA29839@jhogan-linux.le.imgtec.org>

On 07/11/2016 11:07 AM, James Hogan wrote:
> Hi Leonid,
>
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:02:00AM -0700, Leonid Yegoshin wrote:
>> On 07/10/2016 06:04 AM, yhb@ruijie.com.cn wrote:
>>> Subject: [PATCH] MIPS: We need to clear MMU contexts of all other processes
>>>    when asid_cache(cpu) wraps to 0.
>>>
>>> Suppose that asid_cache(cpu) wraps to 0 every n days.
>>> case 1:
>>> (1)Process 1 got ASID 0x101.
>>> (2)Process 1 slept for n days.
>>> (3)asid_cache(cpu) wrapped to 0x101, and process 2 got ASID 0x101.
>>> (4)Process 1 is woken,and ASID of process 1 is same as ASID of process 2.
>>>
>>> case 2:
>>> (1)Process 1 got ASID 0x101 on CPU 1.
>>> (2)Process 1 migrated to CPU 2.
>>> (3)Process 1 migrated to CPU 1 after n days.
>>> (4)asid_cache on CPU 1 wrapped to 0x101, and process 2 got ASID 0x101.
>>> (5)Process 1 is scheduled, and ASID of process 1 is same as ASID of process 2.
>>>
>>> So we need to clear MMU contexts of all other processes when asid_cache(cpu) wraps to 0.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: yhb <yhb@ruijie.com.cn>
>>>
>> I think a more clear description should be given here - there is no
>> indication that wrap happens over 32bit integer.
>>
>> And taking into account "n days" frequency - can we just kill all local
>> ASIDs in all processes (additionally to local_flush_tlb_all) and enforce
>> reassignment if wrap happens? It should be a very rare event, you are
>> first to hit this.
>>
>> It seems to be some localized stuff in get_new_mmu_context() instead of
>> widespread patching.
> That is what this patch does, but to do so it appears you need to lock
> the other tasks one by one, and that must be doable from a context
> switch, i.e. hardirq context, and that requires the task lock to be of
> the _irqsave variant, hence the widespread changes and the relatively
> tiny MIPS change hidden in the middle.
>
Not exactly. The change must be done only for local CPU which executes 
at the moment get_new_mmu_context(). Just prevent preemption here and 
change of cpu_context(THIS_CPU,...) can be done safely - other CPUs 
don't do anything with this variable besides killing it (writing 0 to it).

You can look into flush_tlb_mm() for example how it is cleared for 
single memory map.

We have a macro to safely walk all processes, right? (don't remember 
it's name).

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Leonid Yegoshin <Leonid.Yegoshin@imgtec.com>
To: James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com>
Cc: yhb@ruijie.com.cn, ralf@linux-mips.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Subject: [PATCH] MIPS: We need to clear MMU contexts of all other processes when asid_cache(cpu) wraps to 0.
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 11:19:30 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5783E332.2020503@imgtec.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20160711181930.CJcO6HZcAgXkA7hrY8vh4xCK0HqbzTfyeyc_qQZSkhw@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160711180755.GA29839@jhogan-linux.le.imgtec.org>

On 07/11/2016 11:07 AM, James Hogan wrote:
> Hi Leonid,
>
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:02:00AM -0700, Leonid Yegoshin wrote:
>> On 07/10/2016 06:04 AM, yhb@ruijie.com.cn wrote:
>>> Subject: [PATCH] MIPS: We need to clear MMU contexts of all other processes
>>>    when asid_cache(cpu) wraps to 0.
>>>
>>> Suppose that asid_cache(cpu) wraps to 0 every n days.
>>> case 1:
>>> (1)Process 1 got ASID 0x101.
>>> (2)Process 1 slept for n days.
>>> (3)asid_cache(cpu) wrapped to 0x101, and process 2 got ASID 0x101.
>>> (4)Process 1 is woken,and ASID of process 1 is same as ASID of process 2.
>>>
>>> case 2:
>>> (1)Process 1 got ASID 0x101 on CPU 1.
>>> (2)Process 1 migrated to CPU 2.
>>> (3)Process 1 migrated to CPU 1 after n days.
>>> (4)asid_cache on CPU 1 wrapped to 0x101, and process 2 got ASID 0x101.
>>> (5)Process 1 is scheduled, and ASID of process 1 is same as ASID of process 2.
>>>
>>> So we need to clear MMU contexts of all other processes when asid_cache(cpu) wraps to 0.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: yhb <yhb@ruijie.com.cn>
>>>
>> I think a more clear description should be given here - there is no
>> indication that wrap happens over 32bit integer.
>>
>> And taking into account "n days" frequency - can we just kill all local
>> ASIDs in all processes (additionally to local_flush_tlb_all) and enforce
>> reassignment if wrap happens? It should be a very rare event, you are
>> first to hit this.
>>
>> It seems to be some localized stuff in get_new_mmu_context() instead of
>> widespread patching.
> That is what this patch does, but to do so it appears you need to lock
> the other tasks one by one, and that must be doable from a context
> switch, i.e. hardirq context, and that requires the task lock to be of
> the _irqsave variant, hence the widespread changes and the relatively
> tiny MIPS change hidden in the middle.
>
Not exactly. The change must be done only for local CPU which executes 
at the moment get_new_mmu_context(). Just prevent preemption here and 
change of cpu_context(THIS_CPU,...) can be done safely - other CPUs 
don't do anything with this variable besides killing it (writing 0 to it).

You can look into flush_tlb_mm() for example how it is cleared for 
single memory map.

We have a macro to safely walk all processes, right? (don't remember 
it's name).

  reply	other threads:[~2016-07-11 18:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-07-10 13:04 MIPS: We need to clear MMU contexts of all other processes when asid_cache(cpu) wraps to 0 yhb
2016-07-10 13:04 ` yhb
2016-07-11  9:30 ` James Hogan
2016-07-11  9:30   ` James Hogan
2016-07-11 18:02 ` Leonid Yegoshin
2016-07-11 18:02   ` Leonid Yegoshin
2016-07-11 18:05   ` [PATCH] " Leonid Yegoshin
2016-07-11 18:05     ` Leonid Yegoshin
2016-07-11 18:07   ` James Hogan
2016-07-11 18:07     ` James Hogan
2016-07-11 18:19     ` Leonid Yegoshin [this message]
2016-07-11 18:19       ` [PATCH] " Leonid Yegoshin
2016-07-11 19:21       ` James Hogan
2016-07-11 19:21         ` James Hogan
2016-07-11 19:39         ` Leonid Yegoshin
2016-07-11 19:39           ` Leonid Yegoshin
2016-07-11 20:18           ` James Hogan
2016-07-11 20:18             ` James Hogan
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-07-12  3:48 yhb
2016-07-12  3:48 ` yhb

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=5783E332.2020503@imgtec.com \
    --to=leonid.yegoshin@imgtec.com \
    --cc=james.hogan@imgtec.com \
    --cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
    --cc=ralf@linux-mips.org \
    --cc=yhb@ruijie.com.cn \
    /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.