MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230303231133.1486085-1-eranian@google.com> <20230306120106.GE1267364@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CAKwvOdnRvd5KK01awAyeyt5S36TPPW4_8Z6YL1r4gB-pBrHTbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230307113545.GB2017917@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20230307184315.GS25951@gate.crashing.org> <ZAeh8g0nr3IFRSVI@tucnak>
 <CAHk-=whOLcy=oz=gHyoSSEnqc3M-APKFKTtTvA_3wYYPV8L+oA@mail.gmail.com> <CAHk-=whCA4-uc5WV_-68Mpmu-TiSv6fxkSjZ19zzcW9jpSxDvA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=whCA4-uc5WV_-68Mpmu-TiSv6fxkSjZ19zzcW9jpSxDvA@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Date:   Tue, 7 Mar 2023 22:13:27 -0800
Message-ID: <CABPqkBR_U06L8skMsDXxSXfMptezequzRCxOTELAXxGDK+F+DA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/resctrl: avoid compiler optimization in __resctrl_sched_in
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,
        Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com,
        reinette.chatre@intel.com, fenghua.yu@intel.com,
        peternewman@google.com, james.morse@arm.com, babu.moger@amd.com,
        ananth.narayan@amd.com, vschneid@redhat.com,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <llvm@lists.linux.dev>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 1:06=E2=80=AFPM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 12:54=E2=80=AFPM Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > I think the problem is that the <asm/resctrl.h> code is disgusting and
> > horrible in multiple ways:
> >
> >  (a) it shouldn't define and declare a static function in a header file
> >
> >  (b) the resctrl_sched_in() inline function is misdesigned to begin wit=
h
>
> Ok, so here's a *ttoally* untested and mindless patch to maybe fix
> what I dislike about that resctl code.
>
> Does it fix the code generation issue? I have no idea. But this is
> what I would suggest is the right answer, without actually knowing the
> code any better, and just going on a mindless rampage.
>
> It seems to compile for me, fwiw.
>

On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 3:01=E2=80=AFPM Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@googl=
e.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 2:56=E2=80=AFPM Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 2:03=E2=80=AFPM Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@g=
oogle.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Sounds like Stephane is going to re-run the internal tests he used to
> > > discover the issue with your diff applied, if you don't mind holding
> > > out for another Tested-by tag. EOM
> >
> > Ack. I am in no hurry.
> >
> > In fact, I'd prefer to just get the patch sent back to me with a
> > commit message too, if somebody has the energy. I don't need the
> > credit for a trivial thing like that.
>
> Sure, then maybe Stephane you can supply a v2 with updated commit message=
 and a
>
> Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
>
I verified Linus' patch on my test case on AMD Zen3 and it works as
 expected, i.e., the limit is enforced. I had tried a similar approach myse=
lf
as well and it worked.

I think passing the task pointer is the proper approach because we are
in a sched_in routine
and I would expect the task scheduled in to be passed as argument
instead of having the function
retrieve it from the current pointer.

Thanks.

Tested-by: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>

>              Linus