linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, dennis.chen@arm.com,
	jiangshanlai@gmail.com, josh@joshtriplett.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
	rostedt@goodmis.org, steve.capper@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3] rcu: tree: correctly handle sparse possible cpus
Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 12:03:15 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160531110314.GA4254@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160523161333.GC3825@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 09:13:33AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 11:42:59AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > In many cases in the RCU tree code, we iterate over the set of cpus for
> > a leaf node described by rcu_node::grplo and rcu_node::grphi, checking
> > per-cpu data for each cpu in this range. However, if the set of possible
> > cpus is sparse, some cpus described in this range are not possible, and
> > thus no per-cpu region will have been allocated (or initialised) for
> > them by the generic percpu code.
> > 
> > Erroneous accesses to a per-cpu area for these !possible cpus may fault
> > or may hit other data depending on the addressed generated when the
> > erroneous per cpu offset is applied. In practice, both cases have been
> > observed on arm64 hardware (the former being silent, but detectable with
> > additional patches).
> > 
> > To avoid issues resulting from this, we must iterate over the set of
> > *possible* cpus for a given leaf node. This patch add a new helper,
> > for_each_leaf_node_possible_cpu, to enable this. As iteration is often
> > intertwined with rcu_node local bitmask manipulation, a new
> > leaf_node_cpu_bit helper is added to make this simpler and more
> > consistent. The RCU tree code is made to use both of these where
> > appropriate.
> 
> Thank you, Mark, queued for review and further testing.
> 
> 							Thanx, Paul

Thanks Paul.

Unfortunately, it seems that in my haste to spin v3, I missed your suggested
logic to handle the !cpu_possible(rnp->grplo) case [1]. Sorry about that,
evidently I was not being sufficiently thorough.

Would you be happy to fold that in, as per the diff below? Otherwise I can send
that as a fixup patch, or a respin the whole thing as v4, per your preference.

I've given the below a spin on arm64 atop of -rcu/dev, with and without
RCU_BOOST and/or RCU_TRACE, and I've build-tested likewise for x86. I've
devised and tested the !cpu_possible(rnp->grplo) case by messing with the arm64
SMP code and the RCU tree fanout. So far everything seems happy: no build
issues, UBSAN splats, or other runtime failures.

So fingers crossed, that's the last issue with this patch blatted...

Thanks,
Mark.

[1] lkml.kernel.org/r/20160517190106.GJ3528@linux.vnet.ibm.com

---->8----
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.h b/kernel/rcu/tree.h
index dc0b7da..f714f87 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.h
@@ -291,7 +291,7 @@ struct rcu_node {
  * Iterate over all possible CPUs in a leaf RCU node.
  */
 #define for_each_leaf_node_possible_cpu(rnp, cpu) \
-       for ((cpu) = rnp->grplo; \
+       for ((cpu) = cpumask_next(rnp->grplo - 1, cpu_possible_mask); \
             cpu <= rnp->grphi; \
             cpu = cpumask_next((cpu), cpu_possible_mask))
 

  reply	other threads:[~2016-05-31 11:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-05-23 10:42 [PATCHv3] rcu: tree: correctly handle sparse possible cpus Mark Rutland
2016-05-23 16:13 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-05-31 11:03   ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2016-06-02 13:10     ` Paul E. McKenney

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=20160531110314.GA4254@leverpostej \
    --to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=dennis.chen@arm.com \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=steve.capper@arm.com \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).