by Jonathan Cameron

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 04/16] ACPI: processor: Move checks and availability of acpi_processor earlier

On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 11:13:41 +0100
Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 10:28:38 +0100
> Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 14:17:24 +1000
> > Gavin Shan <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > On 4/26/24 23:51, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > > Make the per_cpu(processors, cpu) entries available earlier so that
> > > > they are available in arch_register_cpu() as ARM64 will need access
> > > > to the acpi_handle to distinguish between acpi_processor_add()
> > > > and earlier registration attempts (which will fail as _STA cannot
> > > > be checked).
> > > >
> > > > Reorder the remove flow to clear this per_cpu() after
> > > > arch_unregister_cpu() has completed, allowing it to be used in
> > > > there as well.
> > > >
> > > > Note that on x86 for the CPU hotplug case, the pr->id prior to
> > > > acpi_map_cpu() may be invalid. Thus the per_cpu() structures
> > > > must be initialized after that call or after checking the ID
> > > > is valid (not hotplug path).
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]>
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > v8: On buggy bios detection when setting per_cpu structures
> > > > do not carry on.
> > > > Fix up the clearing of per cpu structures to remove unwanted
> > > > side effects and ensure an error code isn't use to reference them.
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 79 +++++++++++++++++++++--------------
> > > > 1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> > > > index ba0a6f0ac841..3b180e21f325 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> > > > @@ -183,8 +183,38 @@ static void __init acpi_pcc_cpufreq_init(void) {}
> > > > #endif /* CONFIG_X86 */
> > > >
> > > > /* Initialization */
> > > > +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(void *, processor_device_array);
> > > > +
> > > > +static bool acpi_processor_set_per_cpu(struct acpi_processor *pr,
> > > > + struct acpi_device *device)
> > > > +{
> > > > + BUG_ON(pr->id >= nr_cpu_ids);
> > >
> > > One blank line after BUG_ON() if we need to follow original implementation.
> >
> > Sure unintentional - I'll put that back.
> >
> > >
> > > > + /*
> > > > + * Buggy BIOS check.
> > > > + * ACPI id of processors can be reported wrongly by the BIOS.
> > > > + * Don't trust it blindly
> > > > + */
> > > > + if (per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) != NULL &&
> > > > + per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) != device) {
> > > > + dev_warn(&device->dev,
> > > > + "BIOS reported wrong ACPI id %d for the processor\n",
> > > > + pr->id);
> > > > + /* Give up, but do not abort the namespace scan. */
> > >
> > > It depends on how the return value is handled by the caller if the namespace
> > > is continued to be scanned. The caller can be acpi_processor_hotadd_init()
> > > and acpi_processor_get_info() after this patch is applied. So I think this
> > > specific comment need to be moved to the caller.
> >
> > Good point. This gets messy and was an unintended change.
> >
> > Previously the options were:
> > 1) acpi_processor_get_info() failed for other reasons - this code was never called.
> > 2) acpi_processor_get_info() succeeded without acpi_processor_hotadd_init (non hotplug)
> > this code then ran and would paper over the problem doing a bunch of cleanup under err.
> > 3) acpi_processor_get_info() succeeded with acpi_processor_hotadd_init called.
> > This code then ran and would paper over the problem doing a bunch of cleanup under err.
> >
> > We should maintain that or argue cleanly against it.
> >
> > This isn't helped the the fact I have no idea which cases we care about for that bios
> > bug handling. Do any of those bios's ever do hotplug? Guess we have to try and maintain
> > whatever protection this was offering.
> >
> > Also, the original code leaks data in some paths and I have limited idea
> > of whether it is intentional or not. So to tidy the issue up that you've identified
> > I'll need to try and make that code consistent first.
> >
> > I suspect the only way to do that is going to be to duplicate the allocations we
> > 'want' to leak to deal with the bios bug detection.
> >
> > For example acpi_processor_get_info() failing leaks pr and pr->throttling.shared_cpu_map
> > before this series. After this series we need pr to leak because it's used for the detection
> > via processor_device_array.
> >
> > I'll work through this but it's going to be tricky to tell if we get right.
> > Step 1 will be closing the existing leaks and then we will have something
> > consistent to build on.
> >
> I 'think' that fixing the original leaks makes this all much more straight forward.
> That return 0 for acpi_processor_get_info() never made sense as far as I can tell.
> The pr isn't used after this point.
>
> What about something along lines of.
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> index 161c95c9d60a..97cff4492304 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> @@ -392,8 +392,10 @@ static int acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device,
> device->driver_data = pr;
>
> result = acpi_processor_get_info(device);
> - if (result) /* Processor is not physically present or unavailable */
> - return 0;
> + if (result) { /* Processor is not physically present or unavailable */
> + result = 0;
> + goto err_free_throttling_mask;

FWIW this is wrong, should be goto err_clear_driver_data
(you can see it set just at the top of this block and that never fails!)
The err_free_throttling_mask label should be unused and hence won't exist in v9.

> + }
>
> BUG_ON(pr->id >= nr_cpu_ids);
>
> @@ -408,7 +410,7 @@ static int acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device,
> "BIOS reported wrong ACPI id %d for the processor\n",
> pr->id);
> /* Give up, but do not abort the namespace scan. */
> - goto err;
> + goto err_clear_driver_data;
> }
> /*
> * processor_device_array is not cleared on errors to allow buggy BIOS
> @@ -420,12 +422,12 @@ static int acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device,
> dev = get_cpu_device(pr->id);
> if (!dev) {
> result = -ENODEV;
> - goto err;
> + goto err_clear_per_cpu;
> }
>
> result = acpi_bind_one(dev, device);
> if (result)
> - goto err;
> + goto err_clear_per_cpu;
>
> pr->dev = dev;
>
> @@ -436,10 +438,12 @@ static int acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device,
> dev_err(dev, "Processor driver could not be attached\n");
> acpi_unbind_one(dev);
>
> - err:
> - free_cpumask_var(pr->throttling.shared_cpu_map);
> - device->driver_data = NULL;
> + err_clear_per_cpu:
> per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = NULL;
> + err_clear_driver_data:
> + device->driver_data = NULL;
> + err_free_throttling_mask:
> + free_cpumask_var(pr->throttling.shared_cpu_map);
> err_free_pr:
> kfree(pr);
> return result;
>
> Then the diff on this patch is simply:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> index 3c49eae1e943..3b75f5aeb7ab 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> @@ -200,7 +200,6 @@ static bool acpi_processor_set_per_cpu(struct acpi_processor *pr,
> dev_warn(&device->dev,
> "BIOS reported wrong ACPI id %d for the processor\n",
> pr->id);
> - /* Give up, but do not abort the namespace scan. */
> return false;
> }
> /*
> @@ -230,13 +229,14 @@ static int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct acpi_processor *pr,
> goto out;
>
> if (!acpi_processor_set_per_cpu(pr, device)) {
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> acpi_unmap_cpu(pr->id);
> goto out;
> }
>
> ret = arch_register_cpu(pr->id);
> if (ret) {
> - /* Leave the processor device array in place to detect buggy bios */
> +x /* Leave the processor device array in place to detect buggy bios */
> per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = NULL;
> acpi_unmap_cpu(pr->id);
> goto out;
> @@ -262,7 +262,7 @@ static inline int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct acpi_processor *pr,
> }
> #endif /* CONFIG_ACPI_HOTPLUG_CPU */
>
> -static int acpi_processor_get_info(struct acpi_device *device)
> +static int acpi_processor_get_info(struct acpi_device *device, bool bios_bug)
> {
> union acpi_object object = { 0 };
> struct acpi_buffer buffer = { sizeof(union acpi_object), &object };
> @@ -361,7 +361,7 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_info(struct acpi_device *device)
> return ret;
> } else {
> if (!acpi_processor_set_per_cpu(pr, device))
> - return 0;
> + return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> /*
> > >
> > > Besides, it seems acpi_processor_set_per_cpu() isn't properly called and
> > > memory leakage can happen. More details are given below.
> > >
> > > > + return false;
> > > > + }
> > > > + /*
> > > > + * processor_device_array is not cleared on errors to allow buggy BIOS
> > > > + * checks.
> > > > + */
> > > > + per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) = device;
> > > > + per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = pr;
> > > > +
> > > > + return true;
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_HOTPLUG_CPU
> > > > -static int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct acpi_processor *pr)
> > > > +static int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct acpi_processor *pr,
> > > > + struct acpi_device *device)
> > > > {
> > > > int ret;
> > > >
> > > > @@ -198,8 +228,15 @@ static int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct acpi_processor *pr)
> > > > if (ret)
> > > > goto out;
> > > >
> > > > + if (!acpi_processor_set_per_cpu(pr, device)) {
> > > > + acpi_unmap_cpu(pr->id);
> > > > + goto out;
> > > > + }
> > > > +
> > >
> > > With the 'goto out', zero is returned from acpi_processor_hotadd_init() to acpi_processor_get_info().
>
> Indeed a bug :(
>
> > > The zero return value is carried from acpi_map_cpu() in acpi_processor_hotadd_init(). If I'm correct,
> > > we need return errno from acpi_processor_get_info() to acpi_processor_add() so that cleanup can be
> > > done. For example, the cleanup corresponding to the 'err' tag can be done in acpi_processor_add().
> > > Otherwise, we will have memory leakage.
>
> The confusion here was that previously acpi_processor_add() was missing error cleanup for
> acpi_processor_get_info(). With that in place I think it's all much simpler.
>
> Thanks for your eagle eyes!
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> > >
> > > > ret = arch_register_cpu(pr->id);
> > > > if (ret) {
> > > > + /* Leave the processor device array in place to detect buggy bios */
> > > > + per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = NULL;
> > > > acpi_unmap_cpu(pr->id);
> > > > goto out;
> > > > }
> > > > @@ -217,7 +254,8 @@ static int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct acpi_processor *pr)
> > > > return ret;
> > > > }
> > > > #else
> > > > -static inline int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct acpi_processor *pr)
> > > > +static inline int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct acpi_processor *pr,
> > > > + struct acpi_device *device)
> > > > {
> > > > return -ENODEV;
> > > > }
> > > > @@ -316,10 +354,13 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_info(struct acpi_device *device)
> > > > * because cpuid <-> apicid mapping is persistent now.
> > > > */
> > > > if (invalid_logical_cpuid(pr->id) || !cpu_present(pr->id)) {
> > > > - int ret = acpi_processor_hotadd_init(pr);
> > > > + int ret = acpi_processor_hotadd_init(pr, device);
> > > >
> > > > if (ret)
> > > > return ret;
> > > > + } else {
> > > > + if (!acpi_processor_set_per_cpu(pr, device))
> > > > + return 0;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > >
> > > For non-hotplug case, we still need pass the error to acpi_processor_add() so that
> > > cleanup corresponding 'err' tag can be done. Otherwise, we will have memory leakage.
> > >
> > > > /*
> > > > @@ -365,8 +406,6 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_info(struct acpi_device *device)
> > > > * (cpu_data(cpu)) values, like CPU feature flags, family, model, etc.
> > > > * Such things have to be put in and set up by the processor driver's .probe().
> > > > */
> > > > -static DEFINE_PER_CPU(void *, processor_device_array);
> > > > -
> > > > static int acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device,
> > > > const struct acpi_device_id *id)
> > > > {
> > > > @@ -395,28 +434,6 @@ static int acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device,
> > > > if (result) /* Processor is not physically present or unavailable */
> > > > return 0;
> > > >
> > > > - BUG_ON(pr->id >= nr_cpu_ids);
> > > > -
> > > > - /*
> > > > - * Buggy BIOS check.
> > > > - * ACPI id of processors can be reported wrongly by the BIOS.
> > > > - * Don't trust it blindly
> > > > - */
> > > > - if (per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) != NULL &&
> > > > - per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) != device) {
> > > > - dev_warn(&device->dev,
> > > > - "BIOS reported wrong ACPI id %d for the processor\n",
> > > > - pr->id);
> > > > - /* Give up, but do not abort the namespace scan. */
> > > > - goto err;
> > > > - }
> > > > - /*
> > > > - * processor_device_array is not cleared on errors to allow buggy BIOS
> > > > - * checks.
> > > > - */
> > > > - per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) = device;
> > > > - per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = pr;
> > > > -
> > > > dev = get_cpu_device(pr->id);
> > > > if (!dev) {
> > > > result = -ENODEV;
> > > > @@ -469,10 +486,6 @@ static void acpi_processor_remove(struct acpi_device *device)
> > > > device_release_driver(pr->dev);
> > > > acpi_unbind_one(pr->dev);
> > > >
> > > > - /* Clean up. */
> > > > - per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) = NULL;
> > > > - per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = NULL;
> > > > -
> > > > cpu_maps_update_begin();
> > > > cpus_write_lock();
> > > >
> > > > @@ -480,6 +493,10 @@ static void acpi_processor_remove(struct acpi_device *device)
> > > > arch_unregister_cpu(pr->id);
> > > > acpi_unmap_cpu(pr->id);
> > > >
> > > > + /* Clean up. */
> > > > + per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) = NULL;
> > > > + per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = NULL;
> > > > +
> > > > cpus_write_unlock();
> > > > cpu_maps_update_done();
> > > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Gavin
> > >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

2024-04-30 16:48:26

by Lorenzo Pieralisi

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 09/16] arm64: acpi: Move get_cpu_for_acpi_id() to a header

On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 02:51:19PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> From: James Morse <[email protected]>
>
> ACPI identifies CPUs by UID. get_cpu_for_acpi_id() maps the ACPI UID
> to the Linux CPU number.
>
> The helper to retrieve this mapping is only available in arm64's NUMA
> code.
>
> Move it to live next to get_acpi_id_for_cpu().
>
> Signed-off-by: James Morse <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Gavin Shan <[email protected]>
> Tested-by: Miguel Luis <[email protected]>
> Tested-by: Vishnu Pajjuri <[email protected]>
> Tested-by: Jianyong Wu <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Russell King (Oracle) <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Hanjun Guo <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]>
>
> ---
> v8: Picked up tags.
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h | 11 +++++++++++
> arch/arm64/kernel/acpi_numa.c | 11 -----------
> 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
> index 6792a1f83f2a..bc9a6656fc0c 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
> @@ -119,6 +119,17 @@ static inline u32 get_acpi_id_for_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
> return acpi_cpu_get_madt_gicc(cpu)->uid;
> }
>
> +static inline int get_cpu_for_acpi_id(u32 uid)
> +{
> + int cpu;
> +
> + for (cpu = 0; cpu < nr_cpu_ids; cpu++)
> + if (uid == get_acpi_id_for_cpu(cpu))
> + return cpu;
> +
> + return -EINVAL;
> +}
> +
> static inline void arch_fix_phys_package_id(int num, u32 slot) { }
> void __init acpi_init_cpus(void);
> int apei_claim_sea(struct pt_regs *regs);
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi_numa.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi_numa.c
> index e51535a5f939..0c036a9a3c33 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi_numa.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi_numa.c
> @@ -34,17 +34,6 @@ int __init acpi_numa_get_nid(unsigned int cpu)
> return acpi_early_node_map[cpu];
> }
>
> -static inline int get_cpu_for_acpi_id(u32 uid)
> -{
> - int cpu;
> -
> - for (cpu = 0; cpu < nr_cpu_ids; cpu++)
> - if (uid == get_acpi_id_for_cpu(cpu))
> - return cpu;
> -
> - return -EINVAL;
> -}
> -

Apologies for the late reply.

If anything, it may make sense to squash this patch into the commit that
is actually needing it, lest we might end up with a change that is
useless if it is taken stand alone.

That's all there is to say so:

Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <[email protected]>

> static int __init acpi_parse_gicc_pxm(union acpi_subtable_headers *header,
> const unsigned long end)
> {
> --
> 2.39.2
>