linux-perf-users.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
To: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>,
	kgdb-bugreport@lists.sourceforge.net,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
	mpe@ellerman.id.au, Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@chromium.org>,
	Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@linaro.org>,
	npiggin@gmail.com, davem@davemloft.net,
	Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>,
	sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	ravi.v.shankar@intel.com, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
	Pingfan Liu <kernelfans@gmail.com>,
	Guenter Roeck <groeck@chromium.org>,
	Lecopzer Chen <lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com>,
	Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
	ito-yuichi@fujitsu.com, ricardo.neri@intel.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Masayoshi Mizuma <msys.mizuma@gmail.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 10/18] watchdog/hardlockup: Add a "cpu" param to watchdog_hardlockup_check()
Date: Tue, 23 May 2023 18:02:35 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZGzjm9h85fpYZJMc@alley> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230519101840.v5.10.I3a7d4dd8c23ac30ee0b607d77feb6646b64825c0@changeid>

On Fri 2023-05-19 10:18:34, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> In preparation for the buddy hardlockup detector where the CPU
> checking for lockup might not be the currently running CPU, add a
> "cpu" parameter to watchdog_hardlockup_check().
> 
> As part of this change, make hrtimer_interrupts an atomic_t since now
> the CPU incrementing the value and the CPU reading the value might be
> different. Technially this could also be done with just READ_ONCE and
> WRITE_ONCE, but atomic_t feels a little cleaner in this case.
> 
> While hrtimer_interrupts is made atomic_t, we change
> hrtimer_interrupts_saved from "unsigned long" to "int". The "int" is
> needed to match the data type backing atomic_t for hrtimer_interrupts.
> Even if this changes us from 64-bits to 32-bits (which I don't think
> is true for most compilers), it doesn't really matter. All we ever do
> is increment it every few seconds and compare it to an old value so
> 32-bits is fine (even 16-bits would be). The "signed" vs "unsigned"
> also doesn't matter for simple equality comparisons.
> 
> hrtimer_interrupts_saved is _not_ switched to atomic_t nor even
> accessed with READ_ONCE / WRITE_ONCE. The hrtimer_interrupts_saved is
> always consistently accessed with the same CPU. NOTE: with the
> upcoming "buddy" detector there is one special case. When a CPU goes
> offline/online then we can change which CPU is the one to consistently
> access a given instance of hrtimer_interrupts_saved. We still can't
> end up with a partially updated hrtimer_interrupts_saved, however,
> because we end up petting all affected CPUs to make sure the new and
> old CPU can't end up somehow read/write hrtimer_interrupts_saved at
> the same time.
> 
> --- a/kernel/watchdog.c
> +++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
> @@ -87,29 +87,34 @@ __setup("nmi_watchdog=", hardlockup_panic_setup);
>  
>  #if defined(CONFIG_HARDLOCKUP_DETECTOR_PERF)
>  
> -static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, hrtimer_interrupts);
> -static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, hrtimer_interrupts_saved);
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(atomic_t, hrtimer_interrupts);
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, hrtimer_interrupts_saved);
>  static DEFINE_PER_CPU(bool, watchdog_hardlockup_warned);
>  static unsigned long watchdog_hardlockup_all_cpu_dumped;
>  
> -static bool is_hardlockup(void)
> +static bool is_hardlockup(unsigned int cpu)
>  {
> -	unsigned long hrint = __this_cpu_read(hrtimer_interrupts);
> +	int hrint = atomic_read(&per_cpu(hrtimer_interrupts, cpu));
>  
> -	if (__this_cpu_read(hrtimer_interrupts_saved) == hrint)
> +	if (per_cpu(hrtimer_interrupts_saved, cpu) == hrint)
>  		return true;
>  
> -	__this_cpu_write(hrtimer_interrupts_saved, hrint);
> +	/*
> +	 * NOTE: we don't need any fancy atomic_t or READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE
> +	 * for hrtimer_interrupts_saved. hrtimer_interrupts_saved is
> +	 * written/read by a single CPU.
> +	 */
> +	per_cpu(hrtimer_interrupts_saved, cpu) = hrint;
>  
>  	return false;
>  }
>  
>  static void watchdog_hardlockup_kick(void)
>  {
> -	__this_cpu_inc(hrtimer_interrupts);
> +	atomic_inc(raw_cpu_ptr(&hrtimer_interrupts));

Is there any particular reason why raw_*() is needed, please?

My expectation is that the raw_ API should be used only when
there is a good reason for it. Where a good reason might be
when the checks might fail but the consistency is guaranteed
another way.

IMHO, we should use:

	atomic_inc(this_cpu_ptr(&hrtimer_interrupts));

To be honest, I am a bit lost in the per_cpu API definitions.

But this_cpu_ptr() seems to be implemented the same way as
per_cpu_ptr() when CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT is enabled.
And we use per_cpu_ptr() in is_hardlockup().

Also this_cpu_ptr() is used more commonly:

$> git grep this_cpu_ptr | wc -l
1385
$> git grep raw_cpu_ptr | wc -l
114

>  }
>  
> -void watchdog_hardlockup_check(struct pt_regs *regs)
> +void watchdog_hardlockup_check(unsigned int cpu, struct pt_regs *regs)
>  {
>  	/*
>  	 * Check for a hardlockup by making sure the CPU's timer
> @@ -117,35 +122,42 @@ void watchdog_hardlockup_check(struct pt_regs *regs)
>  	 * fired multiple times before we overflow'd. If it hasn't
>  	 * then this is a good indication the cpu is stuck
>  	 */
> -	if (is_hardlockup()) {
> +	if (is_hardlockup(cpu)) {
>  		unsigned int this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
> +		struct cpumask backtrace_mask = *cpu_online_mask;

Does this work, please?

IMHO, we should use cpumask_copy().

>  
>  		/* Only print hardlockups once. */
> -		if (__this_cpu_read(watchdog_hardlockup_warned))
> +		if (per_cpu(watchdog_hardlockup_warned, cpu))
>  			return;
>  

Otherwise, it looks good to me.

Best Regards,
Petr

  reply	other threads:[~2023-05-23 16:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-05-19 17:18 [PATCH v5 00/18] watchdog/hardlockup: Add the buddy hardlockup detector Douglas Anderson
2023-05-19 17:18 ` [PATCH v5 01/18] watchdog/perf: Define dummy watchdog_update_hrtimer_threshold() on correct config Douglas Anderson
2023-05-19 17:18 ` [PATCH v5 02/18] watchdog/perf: More properly prevent false positives with turbo modes Douglas Anderson
2023-05-23  9:35   ` Petr Mladek
2023-05-19 17:18 ` [PATCH v5 03/18] watchdog: remove WATCHDOG_DEFAULT Douglas Anderson
2023-05-19 17:18 ` [PATCH v5 04/18] watchdog/hardlockup: change watchdog_nmi_enable() to void Douglas Anderson
2023-05-19 17:18 ` [PATCH v5 05/18] watchdog/perf: Ensure CPU-bound context when creating hardlockup detector event Douglas Anderson
2023-05-19 17:18 ` [PATCH v5 06/18] watchdog/hardlockup: Add comments to touch_nmi_watchdog() Douglas Anderson
2023-05-23  9:58   ` Petr Mladek
2023-05-19 17:18 ` [PATCH v5 07/18] watchdog/perf: Rename watchdog_hld.c to watchdog_perf.c Douglas Anderson
2023-05-19 17:18 ` [PATCH v5 08/18] watchdog/hardlockup: Move perf hardlockup checking/panic to common watchdog.c Douglas Anderson
2023-05-23 11:45   ` Petr Mladek
2023-05-19 17:18 ` [PATCH v5 09/18] watchdog/hardlockup: Style changes to watchdog_hardlockup_check() / is_hardlockup() Douglas Anderson
2023-05-19 17:18 ` [PATCH v5 10/18] watchdog/hardlockup: Add a "cpu" param to watchdog_hardlockup_check() Douglas Anderson
2023-05-23 16:02   ` Petr Mladek [this message]
2023-05-23 16:34     ` Doug Anderson
2023-05-24 11:36       ` Petr Mladek
2023-05-19 17:18 ` [PATCH v5 11/18] watchdog/hardlockup: Move perf hardlockup watchdog petting to watchdog.c Douglas Anderson
2023-05-24 13:07   ` Petr Mladek
2023-05-19 17:18 ` [PATCH v5 12/18] watchdog/hardlockup: Rename some "NMI watchdog" constants/function Douglas Anderson
2023-05-24 13:38   ` Petr Mladek
2023-05-25 23:33     ` Doug Anderson
2023-05-19 17:18 ` [PATCH v5 13/18] watchdog/hardlockup: Have the perf hardlockup use __weak functions more cleanly Douglas Anderson
2023-05-24 13:59   ` Petr Mladek
2023-05-24 19:38     ` Doug Anderson
2023-05-26 14:44       ` Petr Mladek
2023-05-19 17:18 ` [PATCH v5 14/18] watchdog/hardlockup: detect hard lockups using secondary (buddy) CPUs Douglas Anderson
2023-05-25 16:26   ` Petr Mladek
2023-05-25 20:08     ` Doug Anderson
2023-05-26 12:29       ` Petr Mladek
2023-05-19 17:18 ` [PATCH v5 15/18] watchdog/perf: Add a weak function for an arch to detect if perf can use NMIs Douglas Anderson
2023-05-26 12:36   ` Petr Mladek
2023-06-12 10:33   ` Mark Rutland
2023-06-12 13:55     ` Doug Anderson
2023-06-12 13:59       ` Mark Rutland
2023-05-19 17:18 ` [PATCH v5 16/18] watchdog/perf: Adapt the watchdog_perf interface for async model Douglas Anderson
2023-05-19 17:18 ` [PATCH v5 17/18] arm64: add hw_nmi_get_sample_period for preparation of lockup detector Douglas Anderson
2023-05-19 17:18 ` [PATCH v5 18/18] arm64: Enable perf events based hard " Douglas Anderson

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=ZGzjm9h85fpYZJMc@alley \
    --to=pmladek@suse.com \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
    --cc=daniel.thompson@linaro.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dianders@chromium.org \
    --cc=eranian@google.com \
    --cc=groeck@chromium.org \
    --cc=irogers@google.com \
    --cc=ito-yuichi@fujitsu.com \
    --cc=kernelfans@gmail.com \
    --cc=kgdb-bugreport@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=mka@chromium.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=msys.mizuma@gmail.com \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=ravi.v.shankar@intel.com \
    --cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
    --cc=ricardo.neri@intel.com \
    --cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sumit.garg@linaro.org \
    --cc=swboyd@chromium.org \
    --cc=tzungbi@chromium.org \
    --cc=wens@csie.org \
    --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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).