From: Karl Mehltretter <kmehltretter@gmail.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>
Cc: Karl Mehltretter <kmehltretter@gmail.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Boqun Feng <boqun@kernel.org>, Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
Hongyan Xia <hongyan.xia@transsion.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>,
Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 00/12] entry, tracing: Classify early hardirq entry and return tails
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2026 07:16:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261022051654.79224-1-kmehltretter@gmail.com> (raw)
Tracing's transition recursion slot exists because a callback can run after
architectural hardirq entry but before generic entry increments
preempt_count(). Steve asked whether the count could be updated soon enough
to remove that slot. This RFC establishes that entry contract on arm64 and
closes a separate recursion window exposed by the same tests.
This is a design RFC, not a merge-ready proposal. I am looking for
feedback on the entry contract before extending it to other architectures
or removing TRACE_CTX_TRANSITION.
Clang can outline raw preempt-count updates and
__kern_my_cpu_offset() from noinstr entry code. This series applies to a
tree with the following two patches added:
- Hongyan Xia, "arm64: Always inline raw preempt count updates"
https://lore.kernel.org/all/c3a90368dd6c096af9d918e036a27728696fb8a4.1786603168.git.hongyan.xia@transsion.com/
- Will Deacon, "arm64: percpu: Annotate __kern_my_cpu_offset() as
'__always_inline'"
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260918161407.2300-12-will@kernel.org
Those patches are external prerequisites and are not included in this
RFC.
Patches 1 through 11 split raw preempt-count updates from generic IRQ
bookkeeping. On arm64, ordinary interrupts add HARDIRQ_OFFSET after the
pseudo-NMI decision but before instrumentable generic entry work. The
remaining accounting still happens in irq_enter_rcu().
The exit side has a similar gap. Function-graph and MTE callbacks can run
after the real hardirq state has been removed, and kernel return may
schedule before them. The series records ordinary-hardirq provenance and
restores a synthetic hardirq classification after the preemption decision.
That tail changes only preempt-count and lockdep state. It does not repeat
interrupt accounting, RCU, or tick entry.
Patch 12 keeps tracing's recursion state inside one preemption-disabled
interval. It closes the transition collision reproduced at the IRQ-exit
reschedule boundary. TRACE_CTX_TRANSITION remains unchanged because
unconverted architecture entry intervals can still run before
preempt_count() reflects hardirq context. An x86-64 no-transition control
still recorded recursion at system-vector entry and exit and in the
deferred hrtimer return tail.
The base includes "entry: Account the deferred hrtimer rearm as hardirq
context for lockdep" and "softirq: Preserve interrupt context on return
from interrupt".
The main questions are:
- Should generic entry expose separate raw-update and bookkeeping phases?
- Are preempt count and lockdep state sufficient for the return tail?
- Is arm64 a suitable first user of this contract?
- Should the recursion-lifetime fix travel with the entry conversion?
Karl Mehltretter (12):
sched: Split preempt-count bookkeeping from raw updates
lockdep: Use raw access for pinned hardirq state
entry: Add the pre-counted ordinary-hardirq entry/exit contract
entry: Skip inactive IRQ-return reschedule calls
context_tracking: Split IRQ-exit preparation from the EQS transition
lockdep: Prepare IRQ-on state from a hardirq return tail
entry: Carry ordinary-hardirq provenance through kernel return
entry: Classify ordinary hardirq return-tail work as hardirq context
arm64: Use the pre-counted hardirq lifecycle
docs: entry: Describe the pre-counted hardirq lifecycle
locking/selftest: Exercise hardirq return-tail preparation
tracing: Pin recursion state for its complete lifetime
Documentation/core-api/entry.rst | 75 ++++++++++--
arch/arm64/include/asm/preempt.h | 2 +-
arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c | 25 ++--
include/linux/context_tracking_irq.h | 32 +++++-
include/linux/hardirq.h | 29 +++++
include/linux/interrupt.h | 2 +-
include/linux/irq-entry-common.h | 96 ++++++++++++++--
include/linux/irqflags.h | 14 ++-
include/linux/preempt.h | 9 ++
include/linux/trace_recursion.h | 14 ++-
kernel/context_tracking.c | 78 ++++++++++---
kernel/entry/common.c | 38 +++++-
kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 48 +++++---
kernel/sched/core.c | 68 +++++++++--
kernel/softirq.c | 166 +++++++++++++++++++++++----
lib/locking-selftest.c | 53 +++++++++
16 files changed, 648 insertions(+), 101 deletions(-)
base-commit: 779ab5d73a22c798d1273b4aaf50cf5b8d750be9
prerequisite-patch-id: 9c009809614854fbff979d65aad6732757d006d5
prerequisite-patch-id: 764fd197db36a3889548bbc41890dd5b3d902f99
--
2.39.5 (Apple Git-154)
next reply other threads:[~2026-10-22 5:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-22 5:16 Karl Mehltretter [this message]
2026-10-22 5:16 ` [RFC PATCH 01/12] sched: Split preempt-count bookkeeping from raw updates Karl Mehltretter
2026-10-22 5:16 ` [RFC PATCH 02/12] lockdep: Use raw access for pinned hardirq state Karl Mehltretter
2026-10-22 5:16 ` [RFC PATCH 03/12] entry: Add the pre-counted ordinary-hardirq entry/exit contract Karl Mehltretter
2026-10-22 5:16 ` [RFC PATCH 04/12] entry: Skip inactive IRQ-return reschedule calls Karl Mehltretter
2026-10-22 5:16 ` [RFC PATCH 05/12] context_tracking: Split IRQ-exit preparation from the EQS transition Karl Mehltretter
2026-10-22 5:16 ` [RFC PATCH 06/12] lockdep: Prepare IRQ-on state from a hardirq return tail Karl Mehltretter
2026-10-22 5:16 ` [RFC PATCH 07/12] entry: Carry ordinary-hardirq provenance through kernel return Karl Mehltretter
2026-10-22 5:16 ` [RFC PATCH 08/12] entry: Classify ordinary hardirq return-tail work as hardirq context Karl Mehltretter
2026-10-22 5:16 ` [RFC PATCH 09/12] arm64: Use the pre-counted hardirq lifecycle Karl Mehltretter
2026-10-22 5:16 ` [RFC PATCH 10/12] docs: entry: Describe " Karl Mehltretter
2026-10-22 5:16 ` [RFC PATCH 11/12] locking/selftest: Exercise hardirq return-tail preparation Karl Mehltretter
2026-10-22 5:16 ` [RFC PATCH 12/12] tracing: Pin recursion state for its complete lifetime Karl Mehltretter
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=20261022051654.79224-1-kmehltretter@gmail.com \
--to=kmehltretter@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=boqun@kernel.org \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=hongyan.xia@transsion.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=justinstitt@google.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=morbo@google.com \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=tglx@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=will@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox