From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: cpu_clock() in NMIs
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:32:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1260819170.4165.346.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091214.110905.207084342.davem@davemloft.net>
On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 11:09 -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 10:02:39 +0100
>
> > I'm not sure, traditionally sched_clock() was always called with IRQs
> > disabled, and on eg. x86 that is needed because we read the TSC and then
> > scale that value depending on CPUfreq state, which can be changed by a
> > CPUfreq interrupt. Allowing NMIs in between isn't really a problem,
> > allowing IRQs in is.
>
> Ok, that looks fine then.
>
> But, speaking more generally, any local_irq_{disable,save}() done in
> an NMI handler has a high probability of being a bug. And it is a
> bug if the IRQ disabling is there to prevent re-entry of the code
> on the local cpu.
>
> > Now, the SPARC implementation might be good without IRQs disabled, but
> > we should at least look at all other arches before we do what you
> > propose below. As it removes the IRQ disable from the callsites whereas
> > it previously always had that.
>
> Here's a quick audit:
>
> 1) Generic kernel/sched_clock.c implementation does a subtraction
> of jiffies with a constant, then does some constant math on it.
> Should be OK.
>
> 2) sparc64 is fine, just reads a register and multiplies with a
> boot time calculated value, then shifts down by a constant.
> Should be OK.
>
> 3) ARM mach-map, same situation as sparc64
>
> 4) ARM mach-pxa, same situation as sparc64
>
> 5) ARM mach-realview, multiplies counter a constant then divides by
> one, should be OK.
>
> 6) ARM mach-sa1100, same as mach-realview
>
> 7) ARM mach-u300, uses boot time computed multiplier and shift,
> should be OK.
>
> 8) ARM mach-versatile, same as mach-realview
>
> 9) ARM plat-IOP, same as mach-u300
>
> 10) ARM plat-omap, same as mach-u300
>
> 11) ARM plat-orion, same as sparc64
>
> 12) Blackfin, TS version is same as sparc64
>
> non-TS version is unnecessary duplication of generic weak
> function version in kernel/sched_clock.c and could be deleted
>
> 13) CRIS, another dup of kernel/sched_clock.c weak function
>
> 14) FRV, another dup of kernel/sched_clock.c weak function
>
> 15) IA64, same as sparc64 for native version.
> Paravirt version uses preemption disable, but also relies on
> IA64 always setting HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK which it does,
> and therefore IA64 would still disable interrupts with my change
>
> 16) m68knommu coldfire, multiplies by a constant then shifts down by
> one, should be OK
>
> 17) mn10300, same as sparc64
>
> 18) powerpc, non-__USE_RTC() case is same as sparc64
>
> __USE_RTC() case also looks fine
>
> 19) s390, depends upon preemption being disabled so that
> stop_machine does not interrupt the sched_clock() call
>
> should be OK
>
> 20) x86 sets HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK
>
> It should be safe.
OK, you convinced me plenty ;-)
I guess we need some debug code to ensure we don't grow any
local_irq_save/restore/disable code in NMI paths, and maybe document
this some place.
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-14 19:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-14 2:25 cpu_clock() in NMIs David Miller
2009-12-14 9:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-12-14 19:09 ` David Miller
2009-12-14 19:32 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2009-12-15 5:36 ` David Miller
2009-12-14 19:57 ` Mike Frysinger
2009-12-15 8:11 ` [tip:sched/urgent] sched: Fix cpu_clock() in NMIs, on !CONFIG_HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK tip-bot for David Miller
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=1260819170.4165.346.camel@twins \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--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