From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: kvm: RCU warning in async pf Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 11:44:53 +0200 Message-ID: <1334396693.2528.45.camel@twins> References: <1333414472.11455.7.camel@lappy> <20120403105226.GF14939@redhat.com> <20120404123033.GD11918@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: Sasha Levin , Avi Kivity , Marcelo Tosatti , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "Paul E. McKenney" , kvm , linux-kernel , Dave Jones To: Gleb Natapov Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120404123033.GD11918@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2012-04-04 at 15:30 +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > @@ -253,7 +254,10 @@ do_async_page_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long error_code) > kvm_async_pf_task_wait((u32)read_cr2()); > break; > case KVM_PV_REASON_PAGE_READY: > + rcu_irq_enter(); > + exit_idle(); > kvm_async_pf_task_wake((u32)read_cr2()); > + rcu_irq_exit(); > break; > } > } Wouldn't irq_enter() / irq_exit() be more appropriate? You're basically taking an interrupt/exception from idle, irq_enter() will fix up everything that needs fixing up, including time sources (which the scheduler expects to be up-to-date).