From: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
rostedt@goodmis.org, mingo@kernel.org,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, gustavo@embeddedor.com,
tglx@linutronix.de, josh@joshtriplett.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, jiangshanlai@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/9] rcu,tracing: Create trace_rcu_{enter,exit}()
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 17:58:53 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200213225853.GB112239@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200213214859.GL2935@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 01:48:59PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 04:19:30PM -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 12:54:42PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 03:44:44PM -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 10:56:12AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > [...]
> > > > > > > It might well be that I could make these functions be NMI-safe, but
> > > > > > > rcu_prepare_for_idle() in particular would be a bit ugly at best.
> > > > > > > So, before looking into that, I have a question. Given these proposed
> > > > > > > changes, will rcu_nmi_exit_common() and rcu_nmi_enter_common() be able
> > > > > > > to just use in_nmi()?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That _should_ already be the case today. That is, if we end up in a
> > > > > > tracer and in_nmi() is unreliable we're already screwed anyway.
> > > > >
> > > > > So something like this, then? This is untested, probably doesn't even
> > > > > build, and could use some careful review from both Peter and Steve,
> > > > > at least. As in the below is the second version of the patch, the first
> > > > > having been missing a couple of important "!" characters.
> > > >
> > > > I removed the static from rcu_nmi_enter()/exit() as it is called from
> > > > outside, that makes it build now. Updated below is Paul's diff. I also added
> > > > NOKPROBE_SYMBOL() to rcu_nmi_exit() to match rcu_nmi_enter() since it seemed
> > > > asymmetric.
> > >
> > > My compiler complained about the static and the __always_inline, so I
> > > fixed those. But please help me out on adding the NOKPROBE_SYMBOL()
> > > to rcu_nmi_exit(). What bad thing happens if we leave this on only
> > > rcu_nmi_enter()?
> >
> > It seemed odd to me we were not allowing kprobe on the rcu_nmi_enter() but
> > allowing it on exit (from a code reading standpoint) so my reaction was to
> > add it to both, but we could probably keep that as a separate
> > patch/discussion since it is slightly unrelated to the patch.. Sorry to
> > confuse the topic.
>
> Actually and perhaps unusually, I was not being sarcastic, but was instead
> asking a serious question. Is the current code correct? Should the
> current NOKPROBE_SYMBOL() be removed? Should the other NOKPROBE_SYMBOL()
> be added? Something else? And either way, why?
Oh ok, it was a fair question. Seems Steve nailed it, only the
rcu_nmi_enter() needs NOKPROBE, although as you mentioned in the other
thread, it would be good to get Masami's eyes on it since he introduced the
NOKPROBE.
thanks,
- Joel
> Thanx, Paul
>
> > thanks,
> >
> > - Joel
> >
> >
> > > Thanx, Paul
> > >
> > > > ---8<-----------------------
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> > > > index d91c9156fab2e..bbcc7767f18ee 100644
> > > > --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> > > > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> > > > @@ -614,16 +614,18 @@ void rcu_user_enter(void)
> > > > }
> > > > #endif /* CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL */
> > > >
> > > > -/*
> > > > +/**
> > > > + * rcu_nmi_exit - inform RCU of exit from NMI context
> > > > + *
> > > > * If we are returning from the outermost NMI handler that interrupted an
> > > > * RCU-idle period, update rdp->dynticks and rdp->dynticks_nmi_nesting
> > > > * to let the RCU grace-period handling know that the CPU is back to
> > > > * being RCU-idle.
> > > > *
> > > > - * If you add or remove a call to rcu_nmi_exit_common(), be sure to test
> > > > + * If you add or remove a call to rcu_nmi_exit(), be sure to test
> > > > * with CONFIG_RCU_EQS_DEBUG=y.
> > > > */
> > > > -static __always_inline void rcu_nmi_exit_common(bool irq)
> > > > +__always_inline void rcu_nmi_exit(void)
> > > > {
> > > > struct rcu_data *rdp = this_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data);
> > > >
> > > > @@ -651,25 +653,15 @@ static __always_inline void rcu_nmi_exit_common(bool irq)
> > > > trace_rcu_dyntick(TPS("Startirq"), rdp->dynticks_nmi_nesting, 0, atomic_read(&rdp->dynticks));
> > > > WRITE_ONCE(rdp->dynticks_nmi_nesting, 0); /* Avoid store tearing. */
> > > >
> > > > - if (irq)
> > > > + if (!in_nmi())
> > > > rcu_prepare_for_idle();
> > > >
> > > > rcu_dynticks_eqs_enter();
> > > >
> > > > - if (irq)
> > > > + if (!in_nmi())
> > > > rcu_dynticks_task_enter();
> > > > }
> > > > -
> > > > -/**
> > > > - * rcu_nmi_exit - inform RCU of exit from NMI context
> > > > - *
> > > > - * If you add or remove a call to rcu_nmi_exit(), be sure to test
> > > > - * with CONFIG_RCU_EQS_DEBUG=y.
> > > > - */
> > > > -void rcu_nmi_exit(void)
> > > > -{
> > > > - rcu_nmi_exit_common(false);
> > > > -}
> > > > +NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(rcu_nmi_exit);
> > > >
> > > > /**
> > > > * rcu_irq_exit - inform RCU that current CPU is exiting irq towards idle
> > > > @@ -693,7 +685,7 @@ void rcu_nmi_exit(void)
> > > > void rcu_irq_exit(void)
> > > > {
> > > > lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled();
> > > > - rcu_nmi_exit_common(true);
> > > > + rcu_nmi_exit();
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > /*
> > > > @@ -777,7 +769,7 @@ void rcu_user_exit(void)
> > > > #endif /* CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL */
> > > >
> > > > /**
> > > > - * rcu_nmi_enter_common - inform RCU of entry to NMI context
> > > > + * rcu_nmi_enter - inform RCU of entry to NMI context
> > > > * @irq: Is this call from rcu_irq_enter?
> > > > *
> > > > * If the CPU was idle from RCU's viewpoint, update rdp->dynticks and
> > > > @@ -786,10 +778,10 @@ void rcu_user_exit(void)
> > > > * long as the nesting level does not overflow an int. (You will probably
> > > > * run out of stack space first.)
> > > > *
> > > > - * If you add or remove a call to rcu_nmi_enter_common(), be sure to test
> > > > + * If you add or remove a call to rcu_nmi_enter(), be sure to test
> > > > * with CONFIG_RCU_EQS_DEBUG=y.
> > > > */
> > > > -static __always_inline void rcu_nmi_enter_common(bool irq)
> > > > +__always_inline void rcu_nmi_enter(void)
> > > > {
> > > > long incby = 2;
> > > > struct rcu_data *rdp = this_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data);
> > > > @@ -807,12 +799,12 @@ static __always_inline void rcu_nmi_enter_common(bool irq)
> > > > */
> > > > if (rcu_dynticks_curr_cpu_in_eqs()) {
> > > >
> > > > - if (irq)
> > > > + if (!in_nmi())
> > > > rcu_dynticks_task_exit();
> > > >
> > > > rcu_dynticks_eqs_exit();
> > > >
> > > > - if (irq)
> > > > + if (!in_nmi())
> > > > rcu_cleanup_after_idle();
> > > >
> > > > incby = 1;
> > > > @@ -834,14 +826,6 @@ static __always_inline void rcu_nmi_enter_common(bool irq)
> > > > rdp->dynticks_nmi_nesting + incby);
> > > > barrier();
> > > > }
> > > > -
> > > > -/**
> > > > - * rcu_nmi_enter - inform RCU of entry to NMI context
> > > > - */
> > > > -void rcu_nmi_enter(void)
> > > > -{
> > > > - rcu_nmi_enter_common(false);
> > > > -}
> > > > NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(rcu_nmi_enter);
> > > >
> > > > /**
> > > > @@ -869,7 +853,7 @@ NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(rcu_nmi_enter);
> > > > void rcu_irq_enter(void)
> > > > {
> > > > lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled();
> > > > - rcu_nmi_enter_common(true);
> > > > + rcu_nmi_enter();
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > /*
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-13 22:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 82+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-12 21:01 [PATCH v2 0/9] tracing vs rcu vs nmi Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-12 21:01 ` [PATCH v2 1/9] rcu: Rename rcu_irq_{enter,exit}_irqson() Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-12 21:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-12 22:38 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-02-12 22:38 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-02-12 21:01 ` [PATCH v2 2/9] rcu: Mark rcu_dynticks_curr_cpu_in_eqs() inline Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-12 21:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-12 22:38 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-02-13 1:41 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-02-13 14:25 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-02-12 21:01 ` [PATCH v2 3/9] rcu,tracing: Create trace_rcu_{enter,exit}() Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-12 21:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-12 23:20 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-02-13 8:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-13 13:31 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-02-13 13:51 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-02-13 16:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-13 18:56 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-02-13 20:44 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-02-13 20:44 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-02-13 20:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-02-13 21:19 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-02-13 21:38 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-02-13 21:38 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-02-13 21:50 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-02-13 21:50 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-02-13 22:04 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-02-13 22:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-02-14 6:19 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-02-15 14:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-02-15 14:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-02-17 8:55 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-02-17 16:31 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-02-18 4:33 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-02-18 16:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-02-18 16:15 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2020-02-18 16:35 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-02-18 17:46 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-02-18 17:46 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-02-18 20:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-02-19 2:45 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-03-06 18:01 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-03-06 18:01 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-03-06 18:47 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-03-06 18:47 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-03-06 19:11 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-03-07 1:58 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-03-07 1:58 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-03-06 0:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-02-13 21:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-02-13 22:58 ` Joel Fernandes [this message]
2020-02-13 22:58 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-02-13 23:55 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-18 20:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-02-18 20:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-18 21:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-02-19 9:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-19 12:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-02-12 23:27 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-02-12 23:27 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-02-13 8:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-13 18:39 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-02-12 21:01 ` [PATCH v2 4/9] sched,rcu,tracing: Avoid tracing before in_nmi() is correct Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-12 21:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-12 21:01 ` [PATCH v2 5/9] x86,tracing: Add comments to do_nmi() Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-12 21:01 ` [PATCH v2 6/9] perf,tracing: Prepare the perf-trace interface for RCU changes Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-12 21:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-12 23:28 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-02-13 8:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-13 18:38 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-02-12 21:01 ` [PATCH v2 7/9] tracing: Employ trace_rcu_{enter,exit}() Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-12 21:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-12 21:01 ` [PATCH v2 8/9] tracing: Remove regular RCU context for _rcuidle tracepoints (again) Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-12 21:01 ` [PATCH v2 9/9] perf,tracing: Allow function tracing when !RCU Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-14 2:28 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2020-02-14 2:42 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2020-02-14 3:32 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-02-14 3:32 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-02-14 20:38 ` Kim Phillips
2020-02-14 22:48 ` Steven Rostedt
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=20200213225853.GB112239@google.com \
--to=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=gustavo@embeddedor.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).