All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dmitry Safonov <dima@arista.com>
To: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, joro@8bytes.org, "Raj,
	Ashok" <ashok.raj@intel.com>
Cc: 0x7f454c46@gmail.com,
	Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 2/2] iommu/vt-d: Limit number of faults to clear in irq handler
Date: Wed, 02 May 2018 13:38:07 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1525264687.14025.20.camel@arista.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5AE95BFF.5040306@linux.intel.com>

Hi Lu,

On Wed, 2018-05-02 at 14:34 +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 03/31/2018 08:33 AM, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
> > Theoretically, on some machines faults might be generated faster
> > than
> > they're cleared by CPU.
> 
> Is this a real case?

No. 1/2 is a real case and this one was discussed on v3:
lkml.kernel.org/r/<20180215191729.15777-1-dima@arista.com>

It's not possible on my hw as far as I tried, but the discussion result
was to fix this theoretical issue too.

> 
> >  Let's limit the cleaning-loop by number of hw
> > fault registers.
> 
> Will this cause the fault recording registers full of faults, hence
> new faults will be dropped without logging?

If faults come faster then they're being cleared - some of them will be
dropped without logging. Not sure if it's worth to report all faults in
such theoretical(!) situation.
If amount of reported faults for such situation is not enough and it's
worth to keep all the faults, then probably we should introduce a
workqueue here (which I did in v1, but it was rejected by the reason
that it will introduce some latency in fault reporting).

> And even worse, new faults will not generate interrupts?

They will, we clear page fault overflow outside of the loop, so any new
fault will raise interrupt, iiuc.

-- 
Thanks,
             Dmitry

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dmitry Safonov via iommu <iommu-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org>
To: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org>,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	joro-zLv9SwRftAIdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, "Raj,
	Ashok" <ashok.raj-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org>,
	0x7f454c46-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	iommu-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 2/2] iommu/vt-d: Limit number of faults to clear in irq handler
Date: Wed, 02 May 2018 13:38:07 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1525264687.14025.20.camel@arista.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5AE95BFF.5040306-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org>

Hi Lu,

On Wed, 2018-05-02 at 14:34 +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 03/31/2018 08:33 AM, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
> > Theoretically, on some machines faults might be generated faster
> > than
> > they're cleared by CPU.
> 
> Is this a real case?

No. 1/2 is a real case and this one was discussed on v3:
lkml.kernel.org/r/<20180215191729.15777-1-dima-nzgTgzXrdUbQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>

It's not possible on my hw as far as I tried, but the discussion result
was to fix this theoretical issue too.

> 
> >  Let's limit the cleaning-loop by number of hw
> > fault registers.
> 
> Will this cause the fault recording registers full of faults, hence
> new faults will be dropped without logging?

If faults come faster then they're being cleared - some of them will be
dropped without logging. Not sure if it's worth to report all faults in
such theoretical(!) situation.
If amount of reported faults for such situation is not enough and it's
worth to keep all the faults, then probably we should introduce a
workqueue here (which I did in v1, but it was rejected by the reason
that it will introduce some latency in fault reporting).

> And even worse, new faults will not generate interrupts?

They will, we clear page fault overflow outside of the loop, so any new
fault will raise interrupt, iiuc.

-- 
Thanks,
             Dmitry

  reply	other threads:[~2018-05-02 12:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-03-31  0:33 [PATCHv4 1/2] iommu/vt-d: Ratelimit each dmar fault printing Dmitry Safonov
2018-03-31  0:33 ` Dmitry Safonov via iommu
2018-03-31  0:33 ` [PATCHv4 2/2] iommu/vt-d: Limit number of faults to clear in irq handler Dmitry Safonov
2018-03-31  0:33   ` Dmitry Safonov via iommu
2018-05-02  6:34   ` Lu Baolu
2018-05-02  6:34     ` Lu Baolu
2018-05-02 12:38     ` Dmitry Safonov [this message]
2018-05-02 12:38       ` Dmitry Safonov via iommu
2018-05-02 23:49       ` Lu Baolu
2018-05-02 23:49         ` Lu Baolu
2018-05-03  0:52         ` Dmitry Safonov
2018-05-03  0:52           ` Dmitry Safonov via iommu
2018-05-03  1:32           ` Lu Baolu
2018-05-03  1:32             ` Lu Baolu
2018-05-03  1:59             ` Dmitry Safonov
2018-05-03  1:59               ` Dmitry Safonov via iommu
2018-05-03  2:16               ` Lu Baolu
2018-05-03  2:16                 ` Lu Baolu
2018-05-03  2:32                 ` Lu Baolu
2018-05-03  2:32                   ` Lu Baolu
2018-05-03  2:34                 ` Dmitry Safonov
2018-05-03  2:34                   ` Dmitry Safonov via iommu
2018-05-03  2:44                   ` Lu Baolu
2018-05-03  2:44                     ` Lu Baolu
2018-05-02  2:22 ` [PATCHv4 1/2] iommu/vt-d: Ratelimit each dmar fault printing Dmitry Safonov
2018-05-02  2:22   ` Dmitry Safonov via iommu
2018-05-03 12:40   ` Joerg Roedel
2018-05-03 16:12     ` Dmitry Safonov
2018-05-03 16:12       ` Dmitry Safonov via iommu

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=1525264687.14025.20.camel@arista.com \
    --to=dima@arista.com \
    --cc=0x7f454c46@gmail.com \
    --cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
    --cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.