[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v13 04/14] xen/percpu: defer freeing per-CPU areas after resume failures
- To: Mykola Kvach <mykola_kvach@xxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2026 12:02:51 +0100
- Authentication-results: eu.smtp.expurgate.cloud; dkim=pass header.s=google header.d=suse.com header.i="@suse.com" header.h="Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:Autocrypt:From:Content-Language:References:Cc:To:Subject:User-Agent:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID"
- Autocrypt: addr=jbeulich@xxxxxxxx; keydata= xsDiBFk3nEQRBADAEaSw6zC/EJkiwGPXbWtPxl2xCdSoeepS07jW8UgcHNurfHvUzogEq5xk hu507c3BarVjyWCJOylMNR98Yd8VqD9UfmX0Hb8/BrA+Hl6/DB/eqGptrf4BSRwcZQM32aZK 7Pj2XbGWIUrZrd70x1eAP9QE3P79Y2oLrsCgbZJfEwCgvz9JjGmQqQkRiTVzlZVCJYcyGGsD /0tbFCzD2h20ahe8rC1gbb3K3qk+LpBtvjBu1RY9drYk0NymiGbJWZgab6t1jM7sk2vuf0Py O9Hf9XBmK0uE9IgMaiCpc32XV9oASz6UJebwkX+zF2jG5I1BfnO9g7KlotcA/v5ClMjgo6Gl MDY4HxoSRu3i1cqqSDtVlt+AOVBJBACrZcnHAUSuCXBPy0jOlBhxPqRWv6ND4c9PH1xjQ3NP nxJuMBS8rnNg22uyfAgmBKNLpLgAGVRMZGaGoJObGf72s6TeIqKJo/LtggAS9qAUiuKVnygo 3wjfkS9A3DRO+SpU7JqWdsveeIQyeyEJ/8PTowmSQLakF+3fote9ybzd880fSmFuIEJldWxp Y2ggPGpiZXVsaWNoQHN1c2UuY29tPsJgBBMRAgAgBQJZN5xEAhsDBgsJCAcDAgQVAggDBBYC AwECHgECF4AACgkQoDSui/t3IH4J+wCfQ5jHdEjCRHj23O/5ttg9r9OIruwAn3103WUITZee e7Sbg12UgcQ5lv7SzsFNBFk3nEQQCACCuTjCjFOUdi5Nm244F+78kLghRcin/awv+IrTcIWF hUpSs1Y91iQQ7KItirz5uwCPlwejSJDQJLIS+QtJHaXDXeV6NI0Uef1hP20+y8qydDiVkv6l IreXjTb7DvksRgJNvCkWtYnlS3mYvQ9NzS9PhyALWbXnH6sIJd2O9lKS1Mrfq+y0IXCP10eS FFGg+Av3IQeFatkJAyju0PPthyTqxSI4lZYuJVPknzgaeuJv/2NccrPvmeDg6Coe7ZIeQ8Yj t0ARxu2xytAkkLCel1Lz1WLmwLstV30g80nkgZf/wr+/BXJW/oIvRlonUkxv+IbBM3dX2OV8 AmRv1ySWPTP7AAMFB/9PQK/VtlNUJvg8GXj9ootzrteGfVZVVT4XBJkfwBcpC/XcPzldjv+3 HYudvpdNK3lLujXeA5fLOH+Z/G9WBc5pFVSMocI71I8bT8lIAzreg0WvkWg5V2WZsUMlnDL9 mpwIGFhlbM3gfDMs7MPMu8YQRFVdUvtSpaAs8OFfGQ0ia3LGZcjA6Ik2+xcqscEJzNH+qh8V m5jjp28yZgaqTaRbg3M/+MTbMpicpZuqF4rnB0AQD12/3BNWDR6bmh+EkYSMcEIpQmBM51qM EKYTQGybRCjpnKHGOxG0rfFY1085mBDZCH5Kx0cl0HVJuQKC+dV2ZY5AqjcKwAxpE75MLFkr wkkEGBECAAkFAlk3nEQCGwwACgkQoDSui/t3IH7nnwCfcJWUDUFKdCsBH/E5d+0ZnMQi+G0A nAuWpQkjM1ASeQwSHEeAWPgskBQL
- Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>, Michal Orzel <michal.orzel@xxxxxxx>, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Tue, 10 Nov 2026 11:03:00 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 27.10.2026 22:05, Mykola Kvach wrote:
> When a CPU fails to come back during system resume, cpu_up() sends
> CPU_UP_CANCELED. After trying the other CPUs, enable_nonboot_cpus()
> sends CPU_RESUME_FAILED for the same CPU.
>
> On architectures which do not park offline CPUs, both notifications
> queue free_percpu_area(). The release metadata, including the rcu_head,
> is stored in that CPU's per-CPU area. The first callback may already
> have freed the area when the second notification arrives, or the same
> rcu_head may be queued twice. The CPU_RESUME_FAILED callbacks also need
> the area to clean up timers and CPU-pool state.
I think there's another change needed, for the change you presently do
to not cause a leak: If enable_nonboot_cpus() calls cpu_up() for a CPU
whose bit isn't set in frozen_cpus, and if that call fails, the CPU
later wouldn't have the CPU_RESUME_FAILED notification sent for it.
IOW the freeing would then not happen at all. Question is whether
simply setting the bit in frozen_cpus would be correct: Notify
handlers may not expect CPU_RESUME_FAILED for a CPU which wasn't
online at the point of suspend.
> --- a/xen/common/percpu.c
> +++ b/xen/common/percpu.c
> @@ -82,6 +82,15 @@ static int cf_check cpu_percpu_callback(
> break;
>
> case CPU_UP_CANCELED:
> + /*
> + * On resume, CPU_RESUME_FAILED is sent after all CPUs have been
> + * tried. Keep the area alive for its cleanup callbacks and let
> + * that notification release it.
> + */
> + if ( system_state == SYS_STATE_resume )
> + break;
> + fallthrough;
> +
> case CPU_DEAD:
> case CPU_RESUME_FAILED:
> if ( !park_offline_cpus && system_state != SYS_STATE_suspend )
Nit: While generally we want blank lines between non-fall-through
case blocks, imo between fall-through ones such blank lines would
better be omitted, to make the falling through visually easier to
notice.
Jan
|