All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	akpm@linuxfoundation.org, Steven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [pchecks v2 2/2] percpu: Add preemption checks to __this_cpu ops
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 10:27:28 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131004082728.GG3081@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <000001417f93fb74-f307f391-26a4-431a-8295-04c5319d1373-000000@email.amazonses.com>

On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 06:28:26PM +0000, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> @@ -538,7 +544,8 @@ do {									\
>  # ifndef __this_cpu_read_8
>  #  define __this_cpu_read_8(pcp)	(*__this_cpu_ptr(&(pcp)))
>  # endif
> -# define __this_cpu_read(pcp)	__pcpu_size_call_return(__this_cpu_read_, (pcp))
> +# define __this_cpu_read(pcp) \
> +	(__this_cpu_preempt_check(),__pcpu_size_call_return(__this_cpu_read_, (pcp)))
>  #endif

Would it not be move convenient to implement it in terms of the
raw_this_cpu*() thingies? That way you're sure they actually do the same
thing and there's only 1 site to change when changing the
implementation.

Something like:

#define __this_cpu_read(pcp) 						\
({									\
	__this_cpu_preempt_check();					\
	raw_this_cpu_read(pcp);						\
})



> @@ -39,8 +39,8 @@ notrace unsigned int debug_smp_processor
>  	if (!printk_ratelimit())
>  		goto out_enable;
>  
> -	printk(KERN_ERR "BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [%08x] "
> -			"code: %s/%d\n",
> +	printk(KERN_ERR "%s in preemptible [%08x] "
> +			"code: %s/%d\n", what,
>  			preempt_count() - 1, current->comm, current->pid);

I would argue for keeping the "BUG" string intact and in front of the
%s.

>  	print_symbol("caller is %s\n", (long)__builtin_return_address(0));
>  	dump_stack();
> @@ -51,5 +51,17 @@ out:
>  	return this_cpu;
>  }
>  
> +notrace unsigned int debug_smp_processor_id(void)
> +{
> +	return check_preemption_disabled("BUG: using smp_processor_id()");
> +}
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(debug_smp_processor_id);
>  
> +notrace void __this_cpu_preempt_check(void)
> +{
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_THIS_CPU_OPERATIONS
> +	check_preemption_disabled("__this_cpu operation");
> +#endif

Because here you've forgotten it..

> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(__this_cpu_preempt_check);

  reply	other threads:[~2013-10-04  8:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20131003182902.174251532@linux.com>
2013-10-03 18:28 ` [pchecks v2 2/2] percpu: Add preemption checks to __this_cpu ops Christoph Lameter
2013-10-04  8:27   ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2013-10-04  8:37     ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-04 15:27     ` Christoph Lameter
2013-10-04 16:52       ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-04 17:26         ` Christoph Lameter
2013-10-03 18:28 ` [pchecks v2 1/2] percpu: Add raw_cpu_ops Christoph Lameter
     [not found] <20130924154159.855373283@linux.com>
2013-09-24 15:41 ` [pchecks v2 2/2] percpu: Add preemption checks to __this_cpu ops Christoph Lameter
2013-09-24 15:41   ` Christoph Lameter
2013-09-24 17:10   ` Ingo Molnar
2013-09-25 16:40     ` Christoph Lameter
2013-09-25 18:11       ` Ingo Molnar
2013-09-27 13:54         ` Christoph Lameter
2013-09-28  8:39           ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-02 15:11             ` Christoph Lameter
2013-10-03  7:26               ` Ingo Molnar
2013-09-28  8:44           ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-02 15:08             ` Christoph Lameter
2013-10-03  7:21               ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-03 13:55                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-03 14:15                 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-10-03 15:35                   ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-03 15:59                     ` Christoph Lameter
2013-10-03 16:44                       ` Ingo Molnar

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=20131004082728.GG3081@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=akpm@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=srostedt@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tj@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.