From: Nathan Lynch <nathanl@linux.ibm.com>
To: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Cc: srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, peterz@infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, clg@kaod.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, mingo@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/smp: do not decrement idle task preempt count in CPU offline
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2021 12:02:33 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <875ytyz0eu.fsf@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87h7dijo4m.mognet@arm.com>
Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> writes:
> On 15/10/21 09:55, Nathan Lynch wrote:
>> With PREEMPT_COUNT=y, when a CPU is offlined and then onlined again, we
>> get:
>>
>> BUG: scheduling while atomic: swapper/1/0/0x00000000
>> no locks held by swapper/1/0.
>> CPU: 1 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/1 Not tainted 5.15.0-rc2+ #100
>> Call Trace:
>> dump_stack_lvl+0xac/0x108
>> __schedule_bug+0xac/0xe0
>> __schedule+0xcf8/0x10d0
>> schedule_idle+0x3c/0x70
>> do_idle+0x2d8/0x4a0
>> cpu_startup_entry+0x38/0x40
>> start_secondary+0x2ec/0x3a0
>> start_secondary_prolog+0x10/0x14
>>
>> This is because powerpc's arch_cpu_idle_dead() decrements the idle task's
>> preempt count, for reasons explained in commit a7c2bb8279d2 ("powerpc:
>> Re-enable preemption before cpu_die()"), specifically "start_secondary()
>> expects a preempt_count() of 0."
>>
>> However, since commit 2c669ef6979c ("powerpc/preempt: Don't touch the idle
>> task's preempt_count during hotplug") and commit f1a0a376ca0c ("sched/core:
>> Initialize the idle task with preemption disabled"), that justification no
>> longer holds.
>>
>> The idle task isn't supposed to re-enable preemption, so remove the
>> vestigial preempt_enable() from the CPU offline path.
>>
>
> Humph, I got confused because 2c669ef6979c explicitly mentions hotplug,
> but that's the hotplug machinery which is already involved for bringing up
> the secondaries at boot time.
>
> IIUC your issue here is the preempt_count being messed up when
> hot-unplugging a CPU, which leads to fireworks during hotplug
That's right.
> (IOW I didn't
> test my last patch against hotplug - my bad!)
>
> Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
No worries and thank you for reviewing.
>> Tested with pseries and powernv in qemu, and pseries on PowerVM.
>>
>> Fixes: 2c669ef6979c ("powerpc/preempt: Don't touch the idle task's preempt_count during hotplug")
>> Fixes: f1a0a376ca0c ("sched/core: Initialize the idle task with preemption disabled")
>
> I think only the first Fixes: is needed.
OK, I'll re-send with that changed as well as your r-b. Thanks.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-15 17:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-15 14:55 [PATCH] powerpc/smp: do not decrement idle task preempt count in CPU offline Nathan Lynch
2021-10-15 15:36 ` Valentin Schneider
2021-10-15 17:02 ` Nathan Lynch [this message]
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=875ytyz0eu.fsf@linux.ibm.com \
--to=nathanl@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=clg@kaod.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
/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).