From: "Charles (Chas) Williams" <ciwillia@brocade.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
<x86@kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"M. Vefa Bicakci" <m.v.b@runbox.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] perf/x86/intel/rapl: avoid access unallocate memory
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 09:20:52 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e3a6f9cb-ee46-6e5c-7b2e-9a6ed2fc949e@brocade.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1611072117040.3501@nanos>
On 11/07/2016 03:20 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Nov 2016, Charles (Chas) Williams wrote:
>> On 11/07/2016 11:19 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2 Nov 2016, Charles (Chas) Williams wrote:
>>>> I don't know why the CPU's phys_proc_id is 2.
>>>
>>> max_physical_pkg_id gets initialized via:
>>>
>>> cpus = boot_cpu_data.x86_max_cores;
>>> max_physical_pkg_id = DIV_ROUND_UP(MAX_LOCAL_APIC, ncpus);
>>>
>>> What's the value of boot_cpu_data.x86_max_cores and MAX_LOCAL_APIC?
>>
>> I have discovered that that is not the problem. smp_init_package_map()
>> is calculating the physical core id using the following:
>>
>> for_each_present_cpu(cpu) {
>> unsigned int apicid = apic->cpu_present_to_apicid(cpu);
>>
>> ...
>> if (!topology_update_package_map(apicid, cpu))
>> continue;
>>
>> ...
>> int topology_update_package_map(unsigned int apicid, unsigned int cpu)
>> {
>> unsigned int new, pkg = apicid >>
>> boot_cpu_data.x86_coreid_bits;
>>
>> But later when the secondary CPU's are identified they use a different
>> calculation using the local APIC ID from the CPU's registers:
>>
>> static void generic_identify(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
>> ...
>> if (c->cpuid_level >= 0x00000001) {
>> c->initial_apicid = (cpuid_ebx(1) >> 24) & 0xFF;
>> ...
>> c->phys_proc_id = c->initial_apicid;
>>
>> So at the end of identify_cpu() when the boot/hotplug assignment is
>> put back:
>>
>> c->logical_proc_id = topology_phys_to_logical_pkg(c->phys_proc_id);
>>
>> topology_phys_to_logical_pkg() is returning an invalid logical processor
>> since one isn't configured.
>>
>> It's not clear to me what the right thing to do is or which is right.
>
> Nice detective work! So the issue is that the package mapping code honours
> boot_cpu_data.x86_coreid_bit, while generic_identify does
> not. boot_cpu_data.x86_coreid_bit is obviously 1 in your case. Tentative
> fix below. I still need to gow through that maze and figure out what could
> go wrong with that :(
I don't think that will fix the issue. My deubugging leads me to believe
that boot_cpu_data.x86_coreid_bits is probably 0:
[ 0.016335] topology_update_package_map: apicid 0 pkg 0 cpu 0
[ 0.016398] smpboot: APIC(0) Converting physical 0 to logical package 0, cpu 0 (ffff88023fc0a040)
[ 0.016399] topology_update_package_map: apicid 1 pkg 1 cpu 1
[ 0.016462] smpboot: APIC(1) Converting physical 1 to logical package 1, cpu 1 (ffff88023fd0a040)
So, I don't know where apic->cpu_present_to_apicid(cpu) is getting its
apicid but it certainly doesn't seem to the match the apicid in the
CPU's registers. For whatever reason, my VMware system is reporting
that the second CPU has a local APIC ID of 2:
[ 0.009115] identify_cpu: cpu_index 0 phys_proc_id is now 0, apicid 0, initial_apicid 0
...
[ 0.237401] identify_cpu: cpu_index 1 phys_proc_id is now 2, apicid 2, initial_apicid 2
I was thinking it might be better to call topology_update_package_map()
at the bottom of identify_cpu() to setup the secondary CPU's. The boot
cpu could be setup during smp_init_package_map().
topology_update_package_map() is also poorly named it can create the
assignment, but can't update it (since it doesn't know the previous
mapping).
> 8<------------------------
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> @@ -905,6 +905,8 @@ static void detect_null_seg_behavior(str
>
> static void generic_identify(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> {
> + unsigned int pkg;
> +
> c->extended_cpuid_level = 0;
>
> if (!have_cpuid_p())
> @@ -929,7 +931,8 @@ static void generic_identify(struct cpui
> c->apicid = c->initial_apicid;
> # endif
> #endif
> - c->phys_proc_id = c->initial_apicid;
> + pkg = c->initial_apicid >> boot_cpu_data.x86_coreid_bits;
> + c->phys_proc_id = pkg;
> }
>
> get_model_name(c); /* Default name */
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-08 14:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-02 12:25 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2016-11-02 22:47 ` Charles (Chas) Williams
2016-11-03 17:47 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2016-11-04 12:20 ` Charles (Chas) Williams
2016-11-04 18:03 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2016-11-04 20:42 ` Charles (Chas) Williams
2016-11-04 20:57 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2016-11-07 16:19 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-07 16:59 ` Charles (Chas) Williams
2016-11-07 20:20 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-08 14:20 ` Charles (Chas) Williams [this message]
2016-11-08 14:31 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-08 14:57 ` Charles (Chas) Williams
2016-11-08 16:22 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-09 15:35 ` [PATCH] x86/cpuid: Deal with broken firmware once more Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-09 15:37 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-09 16:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-09 16:34 ` Charles (Chas) Williams
2016-11-09 18:37 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-09 18:15 ` Charles (Chas) Williams
2016-11-09 20:27 ` [tip:x86/urgent] x86/cpu: Deal with broken firmware (VMWare/XEN) tip-bot for Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-11 5:49 ` Alok Kataria
2016-11-10 3:57 ` [PATCH] x86/cpuid: Deal with broken firmware once more M. Vefa Bicakci
2016-11-10 10:50 ` Charles (Chas) Williams
2016-11-10 11:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-12 22:05 ` M. Vefa Bicakci
2016-11-10 11:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-10 11:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-10 14:02 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-10 15:05 ` Charles (Chas) Williams
2016-11-10 15:31 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-10 15:54 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2016-11-10 17:15 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-12 22:05 ` M. Vefa Bicakci
2016-11-13 18:04 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-13 23:42 ` M. Vefa Bicakci
2016-11-15 1:21 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-18 11:16 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-18 14:22 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-10 15:12 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-10 15:38 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-10 17:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-10 18:01 ` Boris Ostrovsky
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=e3a6f9cb-ee46-6e5c-7b2e-9a6ed2fc949e@brocade.com \
--to=ciwillia@brocade.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=m.v.b@runbox.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®