From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>,
Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Zhimin Luo <zhimin.luo@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/sgx: Fix deadloop in __sgx_alloc_epc_page()
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2024 08:17:53 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f2b0ffc7-f8f8-4ebc-99da-9139c372bd09@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240829023800.1671210-1-aaron.lu@intel.com>
Generally, I think it's a bad idea to refer to function names in
subjects. This, for instance would be much more informative:
x86/sgx: Fix deadlock in SGX NUMA node search
On 8/28/24 19:38, Aaron Lu wrote:
> When current node doesn't have a EPC section configured by firmware and
> all other EPC sections memory are used up, CPU can stuck inside the
> while loop in __sgx_alloc_epc_page() forever and soft lockup will happen.
> Note how nid_of_current will never equal to nid in that while loop because
> nid_of_current is not set in sgx_numa_mask.
>
> Also worth mentioning is that it's perfectly fine for firmware to not
> seup an EPC section on a node. Setting an EPC section on each node can
> be good for performance but that's not a requirement functionality wise.
The changelog is a little rough, but I think Kai gave some good
suggestions. The other thing you can do is dump the text in chatgpt (or
whatever) and have it fix your grammar. It actually does a pretty
decent job.
Also, you didn't say _how_ you fixed this. That needs to be in here.
Something along the lines of:
Rework the loop to start and end on *a* node that has SGX
memory. This avoids the deadlock looking for the current SGX-
lacking node to show up in the loop when it never will.
The code looks fine, so feel free to add:
Acked-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Also, I do think we should probably add some kind of sanity warning to
the SGX code in another patch. If a node on an SGX system has CPUs and
memory, it's very likely it will also have some EPC. It can be
something soft like a pr_info(), but I think it would be nice to have.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-29 15:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-29 2:38 Aaron Lu
2024-08-29 7:47 ` Huang, Kai
2024-08-29 7:56 ` Huang, Kai
2024-08-29 13:22 ` Aaron Lu
2024-08-29 15:17 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2024-08-30 6:02 ` Aaron Lu
2024-08-30 14:03 ` Dave Hansen
2024-09-02 7:57 ` Aaron Lu
2024-08-29 16:44 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2024-08-30 6:14 ` Aaron Lu
2024-09-03 16:05 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2024-09-04 1:39 ` Aaron Lu
2024-09-04 14:17 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
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=f2b0ffc7-f8f8-4ebc-99da-9139c372bd09@intel.com \
--to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=aaron.lu@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jarkko@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=zhimin.luo@intel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®