Re: [PATCH] libbpf: Use the correct fd when attaching to perf events

2021-03-12 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 06:33:01PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 6:22 PM Sultan Alsawaf wrote: > > > > On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 05:31:14PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 1:43 PM Sultan Alsawaf > > > wr

Re: [PATCH] libbpf: Use the correct fd when attaching to perf events

2021-03-12 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 05:31:14PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 1:43 PM Sultan Alsawaf wrote: > > > > From: Sultan Alsawaf > > > > We should be using the program fd here, not the perf event fd. > > Why? Can you elaborate on what is

[PATCH] libbpf: Use the correct fd when attaching to perf events

2021-03-12 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf We should be using the program fd here, not the perf event fd. Fixes: 63f2f5ee856ba ("libbpf: add ability to attach/detach BPF program to perf event") Signed-off-by: Sultan Alsawaf --- tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletio

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] i2c-hid: Save power by reducing i2c xfers with block reads

2020-10-16 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 01:16:18PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 9/22/20 11:19 AM, Jiri Kosina wrote: > > On Wed, 16 Sep 2020, Sultan Alsawaf wrote: > > > >> From: Sultan Alsawaf > >> > >> This is a fixed resubmission of "

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] i2c-hid: Save power by reducing i2c xfers with block reads

2020-09-23 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
ppose the HID part does need to be held off until all the adapters are updated with functional I2C_M_RECV_LEN bits. I just got a Ryzen laptop which panics when using I2C_M_RECV_LEN. So it looks like only the designware changes can be considered for merging now. Sultan

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] i2c: designware: Allow SMBus block reads up to 255 bytes in length

2020-09-17 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 10:57:04PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:22:55PM -0700, Sultan Alsawaf wrote: > > From: Sultan Alsawaf > > > > According to the SMBus 3.0 protocol specification, block transfer limits > > were increased from 32

[PATCH v2 3/4] i2c: designware: Allow SMBus block reads up to 255 bytes in length

2020-09-16 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf According to the SMBus 3.0 protocol specification, block transfer limits were increased from 32 bytes to 255 bytes. Remove the obsolete 32-byte limitation. Signed-off-by: Sultan Alsawaf --- drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-master.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion

[PATCH v2 2/4] i2c: designware: Ensure tx_buf_len is nonzero for SMBus block reads

2020-09-16 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf The point of adding a byte to len in i2c_dw_recv_len() is to make sure that tx_buf_len is nonzero, so that i2c_dw_xfer_msg() can let the i2c controller know that the i2c transaction can end. Otherwise, the i2c controller will think that the transaction can never end

[PATCH v2 1/4] i2c: designware: Fix transfer failures for invalid SMBus block reads

2020-09-16 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf SMBus block reads can be broken because the read function will just skip over bytes it doesn't like until reaching a byte that conforms to the length restrictions for block reads. This is problematic when it isn't known if the incoming payload is indeed a conforming block

[PATCH v2 0/4] i2c-hid: Save power by reducing i2c xfers with block reads

2020-09-16 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf This is a fixed resubmission of "[PATCH 0/2] i2c-hid: Save power by reducing i2c xfers with block reads". That original patchset did not have enough fixes for the designware i2c adapter's I2C_M_RECV_LEN feature, which is documented extensively in the original em

[PATCH v2 4/4] HID: i2c-hid: Use block reads when possible to save power

2020-09-16 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf We have no way of knowing how large an incoming payload is going to be, so the only strategy available up until now has been to always retrieve the maximum possible report length over i2c, which can be quite inefficient. For devices that send reports in block read format

Re: [PATCH v3] i2c: Squash of SMBus block read patchset to save power

2020-09-15 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 02:55:48PM +0300, Jarkko Nikula wrote: > Hi > > On 9/14/20 3:15 AM, Sultan Alsawaf wrote: > > From: Sultan Alsawaf > > > > This is a squash of the following: > > > > i2c: designware: Fix transfer failures for invalid SMBus blo

Re: [PATCH 1/2] locking/mutex: Don't hog RCU read lock while optimistically spinning

2020-09-13 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 05:20:31PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 12:16:35PM -0700, Sultan Alsawaf wrote: > > From: Sultan Alsawaf > > > > There's no reason to hold an RCU read lock the entire time while > > optimistically spinning for a mute

[PATCH v3] i2c: Squash of SMBus block read patchset to save power

2020-09-13 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf This is a squash of the following: i2c: designware: Fix transfer failures for invalid SMBus block reads SMBus block reads can be broken because the read function will just skip over bytes it doesn't like until reaching a byte that conforms to the length restrictions

Re: [PATCH] x86/msr: do not warn on writes to OC_MAILBOX

2020-09-08 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
ptop's thermal design cannot dissipate 35W for very long, but it can sustain 27W without reaching 100 degC quite well. If Intel's recent 14nm CPUs didn't guzzle power, then we would have no need to undervolt. But they do, and here we are. Sultan

[PATCH 1/2] locking/mutex: Don't hog RCU read lock while optimistically spinning

2020-08-07 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf There's no reason to hold an RCU read lock the entire time while optimistically spinning for a mutex lock. This can needlessly lengthen RCU grace periods and slow down synchronize_rcu() when it doesn't brute force the RCU grace period via rcupdate.rcu_expedited=1. Signed

[PATCH 2/2] locking/rwsem: Don't hog RCU read lock while optimistically spinning

2020-08-07 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf There's no reason to hold an RCU read lock the entire time while optimistically spinning for a rwsem. This can needlessly lengthen RCU grace periods and slow down synchronize_rcu() when it doesn't brute force the RCU grace period via rcupdate.rcu_expedited=1. Signed-off

Re: [PATCH v2] HID: i2c-hid: Use block reads when possible to save power

2020-07-01 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 11:04:01AM +0300, Jarkko Nikula wrote: > On 6/29/20 8:43 PM, Sultan Alsawaf wrote: > > Hmm, for some reason in 5.8 I get the same problem, but 5.7 is fine. Could > > you > > try this on 5.7 and see if it works? > > > > In the meantim

Re: [PATCH v2] HID: i2c-hid: Use block reads when possible to save power

2020-06-29 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 02:17:19PM +0300, Jarkko Nikula wrote: > On 6/16/20 6:49 PM, Sultan Alsawaf wrote: > > From: Sultan Alsawaf > > > > We have no way of knowing how large an incoming payload is going to be, > > so the only strategy available up until now

Re: [PATCH v2] HID: i2c-hid: Use block reads when possible to save power

2020-06-16 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 09:02:54PM +0300, Andi Shyti wrote: > Hi Sultan, > > > > > > so the only strategy available up until now has been to always > > > > > retrieve > > > > > the maximum possible report length over i2c, which can be quite &

Re: [PATCH v2] HID: i2c-hid: Use block reads when possible to save power

2020-06-16 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
s involved to reinterpret the reported size. A nice solution would be to pass in how many bytes the i2c payload size can contain, as well as a function pointer to evaluate the reported payload size in a way that the caller wants. This would require modifying every i2c adapter driver to add this functionality, but it would fix the efficiency problem faced by i2c-hid and perhaps others. > I have a patch ready that fixes the smbus transfer size, perhaps > I should rebase, test and send it. For the i2c-hid driver? Sultan

[PATCH v2] HID: i2c-hid: Use block reads when possible to save power

2020-06-16 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf We have no way of knowing how large an incoming payload is going to be, so the only strategy available up until now has been to always retrieve the maximum possible report length over i2c, which can be quite inefficient. For devices that send reports in block read format

[PATCH v2] i2c: designware: Only check the first byte for SMBus block read length

2020-06-16 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf SMBus block reads can be broken because the read function will just skip over bytes it doesn't like until reaching a byte that conforms to the length restrictions for block reads. This is problematic when it isn't known if the incoming payload is indeed a conforming block

Re: [PATCH 1/2] i2c: designware: Only check the first byte for SMBus block read length

2020-06-15 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 07:07:42PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 7:06 PM Sultan Alsawaf wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 12:40:19PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 02:02:54PM -0700, Sultan Alsawaf wrote: > >

Re: [PATCH 1/2] i2c: designware: Only check the first byte for SMBus block read length

2020-06-15 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 12:40:19PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 02:02:54PM -0700, Sultan Alsawaf wrote: > > From: Sultan Alsawaf > > > > SMBus block reads can be broken because the read function will just skip > > over bytes it doesn't

[PATCH 0/2] i2c-hid: Save power by reducing i2c xfers with block reads

2020-06-14 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf Hi, I noticed on my Dell Precision 15 5540 with an i9-9880H that simply putting my finger on the touchpad would increase my system's power consumption by 4W, which is quite considerable. Resting my finger on the touchpad would generate roughly 4000 i2c irqs per second

[PATCH 2/2] HID: i2c-hid: Use block reads when possible to save power

2020-06-14 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf We have no way of knowing how large an incoming payload is going to be, so the only strategy available up until now has been to always retrieve the maximum possible report length over i2c, which can be quite inefficient. For devices that send reports in block read format

[PATCH 1/2] i2c: designware: Only check the first byte for SMBus block read length

2020-06-14 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf SMBus block reads can be broken because the read function will just skip over bytes it doesn't like until reaching a byte that conforms to the length restrictions for block reads. This is problematic when it isn't known if the incoming payload is indeed a conforming block

[PATCH v2] locking/Kconfig: Don't forcefully uninline spin_unlock for PREEMPT

2020-05-29 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf This change was originally done in 2005 without any justification in commit bda98685b855 ("[PATCH] x86: inline spin_unlock if !CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK and !CONFIG_PREEMPT"). Perhaps the reasoning at the time was that PREEMPT was still considered unstable and ne

[PATCH] locking/Kconfig: Don't forcefully uninline spin_unlock for PREEMPT

2020-05-29 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf This change was originally done in 2005 without any justification in commit bda98685b855 ("[PATCH] x86: inline spin_unlock if !CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK and !CONFIG_PREEMPT"). Perhaps the reasoning at the time was that PREEMPT was still considered unstable and ne

[PATCH] drm/i915: Don't enable WaIncreaseLatencyIPCEnabled when IPC is disabled

2020-04-30 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf In commit 5a7d202b1574, a logical AND was erroneously changed to an OR, causing WaIncreaseLatencyIPCEnabled to be enabled unconditionally for kabylake and coffeelake, even when IPC is disabled. Fix the logic so that WaIncreaseLatencyIPCEnabled is only used when IPC

Re: [PATCH] rt-tests: backfire: Don't include asm/uaccess.h directly

2019-09-17 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
undation.org/realtime/communication/send_rt_patches I couldn't find any documentation of how to send patches for rt-tests. Is there a different set of patch submission instructions on a wiki somewhere I missed? Thanks, Sultan

[PATCH] rt-tests: backfire: Don't include asm/uaccess.h directly

2019-09-03 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf Architecture-specific uaccess.h headers can have dependencies on linux/uaccess.h (i.e., VERIFY_WRITE), so it cannot be included directly. Since linux/uaccess.h includes asm/uaccess.h, just do that instead. This fixes compile errors with certain kernels and architectures

Re: [PATCH] mbcache: Speed up cache entry creation

2019-07-23 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
y is low, since an unnecessary call to kmem_cache_alloc() can result in a long wait for pages to be freed. The micro-benchmark code is attached. Thanks, Sultan --- diff --git a/fs/mbcache.c b/fs/mbcache.c index 289f3664061e..e0f22ff8fab8 100644 --- a/fs/mbcache.c +++ b/fs/mbcache.c @@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ stati

[PATCH] mbcache: Speed up cache entry creation

2019-07-22 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf In order to prevent redundant entry creation by racing against itself, mb_cache_entry_create scans through a hash-list of all current entries in order to see if another allocation for the requested new entry has been made. Furthermore, it allocates memory for a new entry

[PATCH] scatterlist: Don't allocate sg lists using __get_free_page

2019-07-12 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf Allocating pages with __get_free_page is slower than going through the slab allocator to grab free pages out from a pool. These are the results from running the code at the bottom of this message: [1.278602] speedtest: __get_free_page: 9 us [1.278606] speedtest

Re: [PATCH] scatterlist: Allocate a contiguous array instead of chaining

2019-07-12 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
the allocation size is too large for kmalloc_node to reasonably accomodate. Also, it looks like the vmalloc family doesn't have kvmalloc's GFP_KERNEL check. Is this intentional, or does vmalloc really not require GFP_KERNEL context? Thanks, Sultan

[PATCH] scatterlist: Allocate a contiguous array instead of chaining

2019-07-12 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf Typically, drivers allocate sg lists of sizes up to a few MiB in size. The current algorithm deals with large sg lists by splitting them into several smaller arrays and chaining them together. But if the sg list allocation is large, and we know the size ahead of time, sg

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-05-15 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
out simple_lmk's locking pattern, and that lockdep's lack of complaints isn't due to it being mysteriously turned off... Sultan

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-05-14 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
h avoids the deadlock, but lockdep doesn't know about the check (which is done with vtsk_is_duplicate()) and should therefore complain. Lockdep does not complain though. Sultan

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-05-13 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
dia with adj 800 to free 40676 KiB [ 71.482511] simple_lmk: Killing rdog.challegram with adj 700 to free 71920 KiB No lockdep warnings! Sultan

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-05-09 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
uot;victims" array twice > after that, > you can do everything in a single loop, but this is cosmetic. Won't this result in potentially holding the task lock way longer than necessary for multiple tasks that aren't going to be killed? Thanks, Sultan

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-05-07 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
t; killers are NOT the way to go. > > > Regardless, even if PSI were backported, a full-fledged LMKD using it has > > yet to > > be made, so it wouldn't be of much use now. > > "LMKD"? Again, PSI is in the 4.9.y android-common tree, so the > userspace side should be in AOSP, right? LMKD as in Android's low-memory-killer daemon. It is in AOSP, but it looks like it's still a work in progress. Thanks, Sultan

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-05-07 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 09:28:47AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > Hi Sultan, > Looks like you are posting this patch for devices that do not use > userspace LMKD solution due to them using older kernels or due to > their vendors sticking to in-kernel solution. If so, I see couple

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-05-07 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
tty tricky :) > On 05/06, Sultan Alsawaf wrote: > > > > +static unsigned long find_victims(struct victim_info *varr, int *vindex, > > + int vmaxlen, int min_adj, int max_adj) > > +{ > > + unsigned long pages_found = 0; > > +

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-05-07 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
ade, so it wouldn't be of much use now. Thanks, Sultan [1] https://source.codeaurora.org/quic/la/kernel/msm-4.9/tree/arch/arm64/configs/sdm845_defconfig?h=LA.UM.7.3.r1-07400-sdm845.0#n492

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-05-07 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
time. Additionally, it looks like the supposedly-dead lowmemorykiller.c is still being actively tweaked by Google [1], which does not instill confidence that a definitive LMK solution a la PSI is coming any time soon. Thanks, Sultan [1] https://android.googlesource.com/kernel/common/+/152bacdd85c46f0c76b00c4acc253e414513634c

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-05-06 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
reclaim and waits until all of its victims' memory is freed before proceeding to kill more processes. Signed-off-by: Sultan Alsawaf --- Hello everyone, I've addressed some of the concerns that were brought up with the first version of the Simple LMK patch. I understand that a kernel-based solution

Re: [RFCv2] string: Use faster alternatives when constant arguments are used

2019-04-01 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
e size of the smaller container being compared. This usage of memcmp (which is quite easy to find all across the kernel) could run into the unaligned memory access across a page boundary that you gave as an example, no? Sultan

Re: [RFCv2] string: Use faster alternatives when constant arguments are used

2019-03-30 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
page boundary when memcmp itself will only read in large buffers of data at word boundaries? And if there are concerns for some arches but not others, then couldn't this be a feasible optimization for those which would work well with it? Sultan

Re: [RFCv2] string: Use faster alternatives when constant arguments are used

2019-03-24 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
"Invalid journal_crypt argument"); if (r) goto bad; } else if (!memcmp(opt_string, "journal_mac:", strlen("journal_mac:"))) { Where opt_string is a dynamically-set argument with no specified minimum length. Sultan

Re: [RFC v3] string: Use faster alternatives when constant arguments are used

2019-03-24 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Sat, Mar 23, 2019 at 08:31:53PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote: > Explicitly cc'ing some folks who have touched include/linux/string.h in > the past and might want to take a look at this. > > Nathan Thanks. One last revision with some nitpicks fixed is attached, though I doubt it'll influence

[RFCv2] string: Use faster alternatives when constant arguments are used

2019-03-23 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
I messed up the return value for strcat in the first patch. Here's a fixed version, ready for some scathing reviews. From: Sultan Alsawaf When strcpy, strcat, and strcmp are used with a literal string, they can be optimized to memcpy or memcmp calls. These alternatives are faster since knowing

[RFC] string: Use faster alternatives when constant arguments are used

2019-03-23 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf When strcpy, strcat, and strcmp are used with a literal string, they can be optimized to memcpy or memcmp calls. These alternatives are faster since knowing the length of a string argument beforehand allows traversal through the string word at a time without being concerned

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-03-14 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
quite a bit of work. If you can solve this with an ebpf program, I > strongly suggest you do that instead. This can be done by introducing a new signal number that provides SIGKILL functionality while blocking (maybe SIGKILLBLOCK?). Thanks, Sultan

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-03-14 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
vided by the kernel (i.e., anyone using PSI to implement their own OOM killer daemon similar to LMKD). Thanks, Sultan

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-03-14 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
sending a SIGKILL to it, then why not just make the SIGKILL optionally block until the process has died completely? It'd be rather trivial to just store a pointer to an onstack completion inside the victim process' task_struct, and then complete it in free_task(). Thanks, Sultan

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-03-12 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 10:17:43AM -0700, Tim Murray wrote: > Knowing whether a SIGKILL'd process has finished reclaiming is as far > as I know not possible without something like procfds. That's where > the 100ms timeout in lmkd comes in. lowmemorykiller and lmkd both > attempt to wait up to

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-03-12 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
out any consequences though, no? Thanks, Sultan

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-03-11 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
when to kill processes that I've proposed. It's an optimization, not a necessity. Thanks, Sultan

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-03-11 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
ld be futile. Thanks, Sultan

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-03-11 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
heavy in-kernel support. > How to implement such interaction between kernel and userspace would > be an interesting discussion which I would be happy to participate in. You could signal a lightweight userspace process that has maximum scheduler priority and have it kill the tasks it'd like. Thanks, Sultan

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-03-11 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
l insights too. I'll take a look at PSI which Joel mentioned as well. Thanks, Sultan Alsawaf

Re: [RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-03-10 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 10:03:35PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 01:34:03PM -0700, Sultan Alsawaf wrote: > > From: Sultan Alsawaf > > > > This is a complete low memory killer solution for Android that is small > > and simple. It kills t

[RFC] simple_lmk: Introduce Simple Low Memory Killer for Android

2019-03-10 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
From: Sultan Alsawaf This is a complete low memory killer solution for Android that is small and simple. It kills the largest, least-important processes it can find whenever a page allocation has completely failed (right after direct reclaim). Processes are killed according to the priorities

[PATCH] dm crypt: fix memory leak in dm_crypt_integrity_io_alloc() error path

2019-02-16 Thread sultan
From: Sultan Alsawaf dm_crypt_integrity_io_alloc() allocates space for an integrity payload but doesn't free it in the error path, leaking memory. Add a bio_integrity_free() invocation upon error to fix the memory leak. Signed-off-by: Sultan Alsawaf --- drivers/md/dm-crypt.c | 4 +++- 1 file

[PATCH] random: fix inconsistent spinlock usage

2019-02-15 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
add_interrupt_randomness()'s spinlocks to use the irqsave primitive. Signed-off-by: Sultan Alsawaf --- drivers/char/random.c | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/char/random.c b/drivers/char/random.c index 38c6d1af6..1365017a7 100644 --- a/drivers/char/random.c

random: remove no-op BUG_ON

2019-02-15 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
container_of simply does pointer arithmetic; it's not going to spit out NULL, so this BUG_ON is unneeded. Signed-off-by: Sultan Alsawaf --- drivers/char/random.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/char/random.c b/drivers/char/random.c index 38c6d1af6

Re: [PATCH] random: remove unused argument from add_interrupt_randomness()

2019-02-15 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
This is still an issue in the latest kernel version. Sultan On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:12 AM Sultan Alsawaf wrote: > > From a872cf4f0bb57a7bb3c95ea557082fb7733344f8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Sultan Alsawaf > Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 20:04:35 -0700 > Subject: [PATCH] random

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-05-01 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 08:56:04PM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 05:43:17PM -0700, Sultan Alsawaf wrote: > > > > I've attached what I think is a reasonable stopgap solution until this is > > actually fixed. If you're willing to revert the

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-05-01 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 08:56:04PM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 05:43:17PM -0700, Sultan Alsawaf wrote: > > > > I've attached what I think is a reasonable stopgap solution until this is > > actually fixed. If you're willing to revert the

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-05-01 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
kout the patches completely from rawhide. I've attached what I think is a reasonable stopgap solution until this is actually fixed. If you're willing to revert the CVE-2018-1108 patches completely, then I don't think you'll mind using this patch in the meantime. Sultan >From 5be2efdde744d3c55d

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-05-01 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
kout the patches completely from rawhide. I've attached what I think is a reasonable stopgap solution until this is actually fixed. If you're willing to revert the CVE-2018-1108 patches completely, then I don't think you'll mind using this patch in the meantime. Sultan >From 5be2efdde744d3c55d

Re: [PATCH] random: remove unused argument from add_interrupt_randomness()

2018-04-30 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
>From a872cf4f0bb57a7bb3c95ea557082fb7733344f8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sultan Alsawaf <sultan...@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 20:04:35 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] random: remove unused argument from add_interrupt_randomness() The irq_flags parameter is not used. Remove it. S

Re: [PATCH] random: remove unused argument from add_interrupt_randomness()

2018-04-30 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
>From a872cf4f0bb57a7bb3c95ea557082fb7733344f8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sultan Alsawaf Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 20:04:35 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] random: remove unused argument from add_interrupt_randomness() The irq_flags parameter is not used. Remove it. Signed-off-by: Sultan Alsa

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-29 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
get entropy? Since hrtimers can't make guarantees down to the nanosecond, there's always a skew between the requested expiry time and the actual expiry time. Please see the attached patch and let me know just how horrible it is. Sultan >From b0d21c38558c661531d4cb46816fbb36b874a169 Mon Sep 17

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-29 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
get entropy? Since hrtimers can't make guarantees down to the nanosecond, there's always a skew between the requested expiry time and the actual expiry time. Please see the attached patch and let me know just how horrible it is. Sultan >From b0d21c38558c661531d4cb46816fbb36b874a169 Mon Sep 17 00:00:0

[PATCH] random: remove unused argument from add_interrupt_randomness()

2018-04-29 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
>From cdc2a03f93fdec88ad040a212605e20ab97c3e19 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sultan Alsawaf <sultan...@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 20:04:35 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] random: remove unused argument from add_interrupt_randomness() The irq_flags parameter is not used. Remove it. S

[PATCH] random: remove unused argument from add_interrupt_randomness()

2018-04-29 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
>From cdc2a03f93fdec88ad040a212605e20ab97c3e19 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sultan Alsawaf Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 20:04:35 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] random: remove unused argument from add_interrupt_randomness() The irq_flags parameter is not used. Remove it. Signed-off-by: Sultan Alsa

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-29 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
in place. But if you _do_ > want to cheat like this, you could instead just modify the condition > to only relax the rate limiting when !crng_init(). Good idea. Attached a new patch that's less intrusive. It still fixes my issue, of course. Sultan >From 6870b0383b88438d842599aa8608a2

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-29 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
in place. But if you _do_ > want to cheat like this, you could instead just modify the condition > to only relax the rate limiting when !crng_init(). Good idea. Attached a new patch that's less intrusive. It still fixes my issue, of course. Sultan >From 6870b0383b88438d842599aa8608a260e6fb

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-29 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
raphic grade entropy before the user has logged in. Because > it's better than the alternatives. > > - Ted > The attached patch fixes my crng init woes. With it, crng init completes 0.86 seconds into boot, but I can't help but feel like a solution t

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-29 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
raphic grade entropy before the user has logged in. Because > it's better than the alternatives. > > - Ted > The attached patch fixes my crng init woes. With it, crng init completes 0.86 seconds into boot, but I can't help but feel like a solution

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-29 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
pression I get from the dmesg output > above. Boot clearly proceeds... somehow. So now I'm confused. Hmm... Well, the attached patch (which redirects /dev/random to /dev/urandom) didn't fix my boot issue, so I'm at a loss as well. Sultan >From 15f54e2756866956d8713fdec92b54c6c69eb1bb Mon

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-29 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
pression I get from the dmesg output > above. Boot clearly proceeds... somehow. So now I'm confused. Hmm... Well, the attached patch (which redirects /dev/random to /dev/urandom) didn't fix my boot issue, so I'm at a loss as well. Sultan >From 15f54e2756866956d8713fdec92b54c6c69eb1bb Mon

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-29 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 08:41:01PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > Umm. No. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xneBjc8z0DE Okay, but /dev/urandom isn't a solution to this problem because it isn't usable until crng init is complete, so it suffers from the same init lag as /dev/random. Sultan

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-29 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 08:41:01PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > Umm. No. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xneBjc8z0DE Okay, but /dev/urandom isn't a solution to this problem because it isn't usable until crng init is complete, so it suffers from the same init lag as /dev/random. Sultan

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-29 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
have any machines that can provide enough boot entropy to satisfy crng init without requiring user-provided entropy? Sultan

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-29 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
have any machines that can provide enough boot entropy to satisfy crng init without requiring user-provided entropy? Sultan

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-29 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 04:32:05PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > This is why ultimately, we do need to attack this problem from both > > ends, which means teaching userspace programs to only request > > cryptographic-grade randomness when it is really needed --- and most > > of the time,

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-29 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 04:32:05PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > This is why ultimately, we do need to attack this problem from both > > ends, which means teaching userspace programs to only request > > cryptographic-grade randomness when it is really needed --- and most > > of the time,

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-27 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 10:20:44PM -0700, Sultan Alsawaf wrote: >> I noted at least 20,000 mmc interrupts before I intervened in the boot >> process to provide entropy >> myself. That's just for mmc, so I'm sure there were even more interrupts >> elsewhere. I

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-27 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 10:20:44PM -0700, Sultan Alsawaf wrote: >> I noted at least 20,000 mmc interrupts before I intervened in the boot >> process to provide entropy >> myself. That's just for mmc, so I'm sure there were even more interrupts >> elsewhere. I

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-26 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
to that :) I noted at least 20,000 mmc interrupts before I intervened in the boot process to provide entropy myself. That's just for mmc, so I'm sure there were even more interrupts elsewhere. Is 20k+ interrupts really not sufficient? There are lots of other sources of entropy available as well, like the ever-changing CPU frequencies reported by any recent Intel chip (i.e., they report precision down to 1 kHz). Why are we so limited to h/w interrupts? Sultan

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-26 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
to that :) I noted at least 20,000 mmc interrupts before I intervened in the boot process to provide entropy myself. That's just for mmc, so I'm sure there were even more interrupts elsewhere. Is 20k+ interrupts really not sufficient? There are lots of other sources of entropy available as well, like the ever-changing CPU frequencies reported by any recent Intel chip (i.e., they report precision down to 1 kHz). Why are we so limited to h/w interrupts? Sultan

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-26 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
eed for user-provided entropy. Userspace was working fine before the recent CRNG kernel changes, so I don't think this is a userspace bug. -Sultan

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-26 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
eed for user-provided entropy. Userspace was working fine before the recent CRNG kernel changes, so I don't think this is a userspace bug. -Sultan

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-26 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
> Hmm, can you let the boot hang for a while? It should continue after > a few minutes if you wait long enough, but wait a minute or two, then > give it entropy so the boot can continue. Then can you use > "systemd-analyze blame" or "systemd-analyize critical-chain" and we > can see what process

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-26 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
> Hmm, can you let the boot hang for a while? It should continue after > a few minutes if you wait long enough, but wait a minute or two, then > give it entropy so the boot can continue. Then can you use > "systemd-analyze blame" or "systemd-analyize critical-chain" and we > can see what process

Re: Linux messages full of `random: get_random_u32 called from`

2018-04-25 Thread Sultan Alsawaf
> Thanks for the report! > > I assume since you're upgrading your own kernel, you must not be > running Chrome OS on your Acer CB3-431 Chromebook (Edgar). Are you > running Chromium --- or some Linux distribution on it? > > Thanks, > > - Ted Correct, I'm

  1   2   >