On Wed, May 22 2024 at 15:02, Dongli Zhang wrote:
> The absence of IRQD_MOVE_PCNTXT prevents immediate effectiveness of
> interrupt affinity reconfiguration via procfs. Instead, the change is
> deferred until the next instance of the interrupt being triggered on the
> original CPU.
>
> When the interrupt next triggers on the original CPU, the new affinity is
> enforced within __irq_move_irq(). A vector is allocated from the new CPU,
> but if the old vector on the original CPU remains online, it is not
> immediately reclaimed. Instead, apicd->move_in_progress is flagged, and the
> reclaiming process is delayed until the next trigger of the interrupt on
> the new CPU.
>
> Upon the subsequent triggering of the interrupt on the new CPU,
> irq_complete_move() adds a task to the old CPU's vector_cleanup list if it
> remains online. Subsequently, the timer on the old CPU iterates over its
> vector_cleanup list, reclaiming old vectors.
>
> However, a rare scenario arises if the old CPU is outgoing before the
> interrupt triggers again on the new CPU. The irq_force_complete_move() may
> not have the chance to be invoked on the outgoing CPU to reclaim the old
> apicd->prev_vector. This is because the interrupt isn't currently affine to
> the outgoing CPU, and irq_needs_fixup() returns false. Even though
> __vector_schedule_cleanup() is later called on the new CPU, it doesn't
> reclaim apicd->prev_vector; instead, it simply resets both
> apicd->move_in_progress and apicd->prev_vector to 0.
>
> As a result, the vector remains unreclaimed in vector_matrix, leading to a
> CPU vector leak.
>
> To address this issue, move the invocation of irq_force_complete_move()
> before the irq_needs_fixup() call to reclaim apicd->prev_vector, if the
> interrupt is currently or used to affine to the outgoing CPU. Additionally,
> reclaim the vector in __vector_schedule_cleanup() as well, following a
> warning message, although theoretically it should never see
> apicd->move_in_progress with apicd->prev_cpu pointing to an offline CPU.

Nice change log!

Reply via email to