From: David Arcari <darcari@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
x86@kernel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>, Donald Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>,
Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>,
Jerry Hoemann <jerry.hoemann@hpe.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/x86: read the FREEZE_WHILE_SMM bit during boot
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 13:57:22 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a8202fa8-a368-947f-994f-060ce83d188b@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e420bcc1-c75d-e6a1-0ca6-b668b6818f16@redhat.com>
On 06/04/2018 10:12 AM, David Arcari wrote:
> On 06/04/2018 04:24 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 02:23:43PM -0400, David Arcari wrote:
>>> On some systems pressing the external NMI button is now failing to inject
>>> an NMI 5-10% of the time. This causes confusion for a user that expects
>>> the NMI to dump the system.
>>>
>>> Commit 6089327f5424 ("perf/x86: Add sysfs entry to freeze counters on SMI")
>>> does not read the firmware setting of the FREEZE_WHILE_SMM bit and will
>>> always clear it when the PMU is initialized. As a result the performance
>>> counters will always run and that greatly expands the race in which
>>> external NMI will not be processed if a local NMI is already being
>>> processed.
>>>
>>> One option is to change default_do_nmi(). The code snippet below shows the
>>> relevant portion of a patch that resolves the issue, but it is problematic
>>> from a performance perspective and was dismissed.
>>>
>>> -345,7 +345,17 @@ static void default_do_nmi(struct pt_regs *regs)
>>> */
>>> if (handled > 1)
>>> __this_cpu_write(swallow_nmi, true);
>>> - return;
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * Unfortunately, there is a race condition which can
>>> + * result in a missing an external NMI. Typically, an
>>> + * external NMI is processed on cpu 0. Therefore, on
>>> + * cpu 0 check for an external NMI before returning.
>>> + */
>>> + if (smp_processor_id() ||
>>> + (x86_platform.get_nmi_reason() & NMI_REASON_MASK) == 0) {
>>> + return;
>>> + }
>>> }
>>>
>>> Ultimately, the issue can be resolved by storing the default firmware
>>> setting of FREEZE_WHILE_SMM before initializing the PMU.
>>
>> I'm sorry, I know it's Monday morning, but what?! I really don't
>> understand anything you write there.
>>
>> Maybe if you explain the race and how your proposed fix closes it things
>> will make sense. The above refers to too many things not here.
>>
>
> Sorry.
>
> default_do_nmi() will process both perf events (local interrupts) as well as
> external interrupts (such as the NMI button). The handler is coded such that
> if a local interrupt occurs, no check is made for an external interrupt.
> Therefore, if the two interrupts occur simultaneously, the external interrupt
> is lost.
>
> The code above, which was ultimately discounted, attempts to avoid this
> scenario with as little performance impact as possible by reading the register
> without the spinlock for cpu 0 only (currently only cpu 0 can handle an
> external NMI, I verified this on my system by testing the NMI button with
> cpu 0 offline).
>
> The code above is problematic for a number of reasons not the least of which
> is performance. Furthermore, I don't see a less intrusive solution wrt
> do_default_nmi().
>
> Upstream 6089327f5424 ("perf/x86: Add sysfs entry to freeze counters on SMI")
> appears to have made it relatively easy to hit this race condition. On some
> systems, this commit has resulted in a change to the default firmware setting
> of DEBUGCTLMSR_FREEZE_IN_SMM_BIT (it is now cleared by the OS by default).
>
> With this bit cleared, the following situation occurs:
>
> 1) external NMI - due to io check
> 2) long duration SMI (counters do not freeze)
> 3) NMI handler runs and misattributes interrupt to perf event
>
> Ultimately, my solution was to restore the previous behavior by reading and
> storing the firmware setting of the bit rather than to always clear it.
>
Hi Peter,
Have you had a chance to take a look at this?
Thanks,
-Dave
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-11 17:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-03 18:23 David Arcari
2018-06-04 8:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-06-04 14:12 ` David Arcari
2018-06-11 17:57 ` David Arcari [this message]
2018-06-12 16:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-06-18 19:14 ` David Arcari
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=a8202fa8-a368-947f-994f-060ce83d188b@redhat.com \
--to=darcari@redhat.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jerry.hoemann@hpe.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=prarit@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®