From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Paul E. McKenney" Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] nohz: support PR_DATAPLANE_STRICT mode Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 06:20:04 -0700 Message-ID: <20150512132004.GL6776@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <1431107927-13998-1-git-send-email-cmetcalf@ezchip.com> <1431107927-13998-6-git-send-email-cmetcalf@ezchip.com> <20150512093858.GI21418@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Reply-To: paulmck-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150512093858.GI21418-ndre7Fmf5hadTX5a5knrm8zTDFooKrT+cvkQGrU6aU0@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Chris Metcalf , Gilad Ben Yossef , Steven Rostedt , Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton , Rik van Riel , Tejun Heo , Thomas Gleixner , Frederic Weisbecker , Christoph Lameter , "Srivatsa S. Bhat" , linux-doc-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 11:38:58AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 01:58:46PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote: > > +++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c > > @@ -436,6 +436,20 @@ static void dataplane_quiesce(void) > > (jiffies - start)); > > dump_stack(); > > } > > + > > + /* > > + * Kill the process if it violates STRICT mode. Note that this > > + * code also results in killing the task if a kernel bug causes an > > + * irq to be delivered to this core. > > + */ > > + if ((task->dataplane_flags & (PR_DATAPLANE_STRICT|PR_DATAPLANE_PRCTL)) > > + == PR_DATAPLANE_STRICT) { > > + pr_warn("Dataplane STRICT mode violated; process killed.\n"); > > + dump_stack(); > > + task->dataplane_flags &= ~PR_DATAPLANE_QUIESCE; > > + local_irq_enable(); > > + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); > > + } > > } > > So while I'm all for hard fails like this, can we not provide a wee bit > more information in the siginfo ? And maybe use a slightly less fatal > signal, such that userspace can actually catch it and dump state in > debug modes? Agreed, a bit more debug state would be helpful. Thanx, Paul