From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Florian Bezdeka" <florian.bezdeka@siemens.com>
Cc: linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/3] cpumask: Honor irq_default_affinity in cpumask_local_spread()
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2026 14:30:46 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260820143046.D2C641F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260819-flo-net-7-2-make-stmmac-default-affinity-aware-v1-1-3f79a99cadaf@siemens.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Critical] cpumask_local_spread() can return an invalid CPU index (>= nr_cpu_ids) when offline CPUs are present in irq_default_affinity, leading to out-of-bounds memory accesses in callers.
- [High] Unprotected, non-atomic accesses to irq_default_affinity in cpumask_local_spread() can race with concurrent updates from procfs, causing a division by zero or an out-of-bounds index return.
--
--- Patch [1]: [PATCH RFC 1/3] cpumask: Honor irq_default_affinity in cpumask_local_spread() ---
commit 451b7ef83d22392d8351ba057c391bf3a21095c8
Author: Florian Bezdeka <florian.bezdeka@siemens.com>
cpumask: Honor irq_default_affinity in cpumask_local_spread()
This patch updates cpumask_local_spread() to honor irq_default_affinity
instead of cpu_online_mask. This aims to prevent IRQs from targeting
isolated CPUs for workloads like PREEMPT_RT.
> diff --git a/lib/cpumask.c b/lib/cpumask.c
> index 5adb9874fbd0f..73e7b60a92011 100644
> --- a/lib/cpumask.c
> +++ b/lib/cpumask.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -110,9 +112,9 @@ unsigned int cpumask_local_spread(unsigned int i, int node)
> unsigned int cpu;
>
> /* Wrap: we always want a cpu. */
> - i %= num_online_cpus();
> + i %= cpumask_weight(irq_default_affinity);
[Severity: High]
Is it possible for a concurrent write to irq_default_affinity to cause a
division by zero?
Userland can update the mask via /proc/irq/default_smp_affinity, which
uses a non-atomic cpumask_copy() in default_affinity_write().
If cpumask_local_spread() locklessly computes the weight while bits are
being copied, could it momentarily observe a weight of 0 and trigger a
division by zero panic here?
>
> - cpu = sched_numa_find_nth_cpu(cpu_online_mask, i, node);
> + cpu = sched_numa_find_nth_cpu(irq_default_affinity, i, node);
[Severity: Critical]
Does this code return an invalid CPU index if there are offline CPUs
present in irq_default_affinity?
The modulo above uses cpumask_weight(irq_default_affinity), which
counts all bits in the mask regardless of whether the CPUs are online.
However, sched_numa_find_nth_cpu() only searches within cpu_online_mask:
include/linux/topology.h:sched_numa_find_nth_cpu() {
return cpumask_nth_and(cpu, cpus, cpu_online_mask);
}
If irq_default_affinity contains offline CPUs, the weight can be larger than
the number of online CPUs.
If i ends up larger than or equal to the number of online CPUs in the mask,
won't sched_numa_find_nth_cpu() fail and return an index >= nr_cpu_ids,
causing out-of-bounds memory accesses in callers?
>
> WARN_ON(cpu >= nr_cpu_ids);
> return cpu;
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260819-flo-net-7-2-make-stmmac-default-affinity-aware-v1-0-3f79a99cadaf@siemens.com?part=1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-20 14:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-19 14:30 [PATCH RFC 0/3] genirq: Allow drivers to respect userspace IRQ affinities Florian Bezdeka
2026-08-19 14:30 ` [PATCH RFC 1/3] cpumask: Honor irq_default_affinity in cpumask_local_spread() Florian Bezdeka
2026-08-19 18:38 ` Yury Norov
2026-08-20 16:09 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-08-20 14:30 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-08-19 14:30 ` [PATCH RFC 2/3] genirq: Honor existing IRQ affinities when setting affinity hints Florian Bezdeka
2026-08-20 14:30 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-20 16:41 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-08-19 14:30 ` [PATCH RFC 3/3] net: stmmac: Migrate IRQ balancing to cpumask_local_spread() Florian Bezdeka
2026-08-19 18:45 ` Yury Norov
2026-08-20 14:30 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-19 18:28 ` [PATCH RFC 0/3] genirq: Allow drivers to respect userspace IRQ affinities Yury Norov
2026-08-19 23:54 ` Andrew Lunn
2026-08-20 0:10 ` Andrew Lunn
2026-08-20 15:12 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
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=20260820143046.D2C641F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=florian.bezdeka@siemens.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox