From: "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@kernel.org>
To: "Haitao Huang" <haitao.huang@linux.intel.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org>,
<dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"Bojun Zhu" <zhubojun.zbj@antgroup.com>
Cc: reinette.chatre@intel.com, "刘双(轩屹)" <ls123674@antgroup.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 1/1] x86/sgx: Explicitly give up the CPU in EDMM's ioctl() to avoid softlockup
Date: Thu, 16 May 2024 11:24:50 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <D1AXBB05CMIB.3STPF6CZCSMK3@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <op.2nt1vls9wjvjmi@hhuan26-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com>
On Thu May 16, 2024 at 12:55 AM EEST, Haitao Huang wrote:
> On Wed, 15 May 2024 01:55:21 -0500, Bojun Zhu <zhubojun.zbj@antgroup.com>
> wrote:
>
> > EDMM's ioctl()s support batch operations, which may be
> > time-consuming. Try to explicitly give up the CPU as the prefix
> > operation at the every begin of "for loop" in
> > sgx_enclave_{ modify_types | restrict_permissions | remove_pages}
> > to give other tasks a chance to run, and avoid softlockup warning.
> >
> > Additionally perform pending signals check as the prefix operation,
> > and introduce sgx_check_signal_and_resched(),
> > which wraps all the checks.
> >
> > The following has been observed on Linux v6.9-rc5 with kernel
> > preemptions disabled(by configuring "PREEMPT_NONE=y"), when kernel
> > is requested to restrict page permissions of a large number of EPC pages.
> >
> > ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#45 stuck for 22s!
> > ...
> > RIP: 0010:sgx_enclave_restrict_permissions+0xba/0x1f0
> > ...
> > Call Trace:
> > sgx_ioctl
> > __x64_sys_ioctl
> > x64_sys_call
> > do_syscall_64
> > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe
> > ------------[ end trace ]------------
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Bojun Zhu <zhubojun.zbj@antgroup.com>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> > 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c
> > b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c
> > index b65ab214bdf5..6199f483143e 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c
> > @@ -365,6 +365,20 @@ static int sgx_validate_offset_length(struct
> > sgx_encl *encl,
> > return 0;
> > }
> > +/*
> > + * Check signals and invoke scheduler. Return true for a pending signal.
> > + */
> > +static bool sgx_check_signal_and_resched(void)
> > +{
> > + if (signal_pending(current))
> > + return true;
> > +
> > + if (need_resched())
> > + cond_resched();
> > +
> > + return false;
> > +}
> > +
> > /**
> > * sgx_ioc_enclave_add_pages() - The handler for
> > %SGX_IOC_ENCLAVE_ADD_PAGES
> > * @encl: an enclave pointer
> > @@ -409,7 +423,7 @@ static long sgx_ioc_enclave_add_pages(struct
> > sgx_encl *encl, void __user *arg)
> > struct sgx_enclave_add_pages add_arg;
> > struct sgx_secinfo secinfo;
> > unsigned long c;
> > - int ret;
> > + int ret = -ERESTARTSYS;
> > if (!test_bit(SGX_ENCL_CREATED, &encl->flags) ||
> > test_bit(SGX_ENCL_INITIALIZED, &encl->flags))
> > @@ -432,15 +446,8 @@ static long sgx_ioc_enclave_add_pages(struct
> > sgx_encl *encl, void __user *arg)
> > return -EINVAL;
> > for (c = 0 ; c < add_arg.length; c += PAGE_SIZE) {
> > - if (signal_pending(current)) {
> > - if (!c)
> > - ret = -ERESTARTSYS;
> > -
> > + if (sgx_check_signal_and_resched())
> > break;
> > - }
>
> ERESTARTSYS is only appropriate if we have not EADDed any pages yet.
> If we got interrupted in the middle, we should return 0. User space would
> check the 'count' returned and decide to recall this ioctl() with
> 'offset' reset to the next page, and adjust length.
Good catch! Thanks Haitao for the remark.
BR, Jarkko
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-16 8:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-15 6:55 [RFC PATCH v3 0/1] x86/sgx: Explicitly give up the CPU in EDMM's ioctl() to avoid softlockup Bojun Zhu
2024-05-15 6:55 ` [RFC PATCH v3 1/1] " Bojun Zhu
2024-05-15 12:06 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2024-05-15 21:55 ` Haitao Huang
2024-05-15 22:29 ` Haitao Huang
2024-05-16 8:26 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2024-05-16 8:24 ` Jarkko Sakkinen [this message]
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=D1AXBB05CMIB.3STPF6CZCSMK3@kernel.org \
--to=jarkko@kernel.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=haitao.huang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ls123674@antgroup.com \
--cc=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
--cc=zhubojun.zbj@antgroup.com \
/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