From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj@krystal.dyndns.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] ring-buffer: less locking and only disable preemption
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2008 19:41:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081004174121.GA1337@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081004144423.GA14918@elte.hu>
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> * Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> > The dynamic function tracer is another issue. The problem with NMIs
> > has nothing to do with locking, or corrupting the buffers. It has to
> > do with the dynamic code modification. Whenever we modify code, we
> > must guarantee that it will not be executed on another CPU.
> >
> > Kstop_machine serves this purpose rather well. We can modify code
> > without worrying it will be executed on another CPU, except for NMIs.
> > The problem now comes where an NMI can come in and execute the code
> > being modified. That's why I put in all the notrace, lines. But it
> > gets difficult because of nmi_notifier can call all over the kernel.
> > Perhaps, we can simply disable the nmi-notifier when we are doing the
> > kstop_machine call?
>
> that would definitely be one way to reduce the cross section, but not
> enough i'm afraid. For example in the nmi_watchdog=2 case we call into
> various lapic functions and paravirt lapic handlers which makes it all
> spread to 3-4 paravirtualization flavors ...
>
> sched_clock()'s notrace aspects were pretty manageable, but this in
> its current form is not.
there's a relatively simple method that would solve all these
impact-size problems.
We cannot stop NMIs (and MCEs, etc.), but we can make kernel code
modifications atomic, by adding the following thin layer ontop of it:
#define MAX_CODE_SIZE 10
int redo_len;
u8 *redo_vaddr;
u8 redo_buffer[MAX_CODE_SIZE];
atomic_t __read_mostly redo_pending;
and use it in do_nmi():
if (unlikely(atomic_read(&redo_pending)))
modify_code_redo();
i.e. when we modify code, we first fill in the redo_buffer[], redo_vaddr
and redo_len[], then we set redo_pending flag. Then we modify the kernel
code, and clear the redo_pending flag.
If an NMI (or MCE) handler intervenes, it will notice the pending
'transaction' and will copy redo_buffer[] to the (redo_vaddr,len)
location and will continue.
So as far as non-maskable contexts are concerned, kernel code patching
becomes an atomic operation. do_nmi() has to be marked notrace but
that's all and easy to maintain.
Hm?
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-04 17:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-04 6:00 [PATCH 0/3] ring-buffer: less locking and only disable preemption Steven Rostedt
2008-10-04 6:00 ` [PATCH 1/3] ring-buffer: move page indexes into page headers Steven Rostedt
2008-10-04 6:00 ` [PATCH 2/3] ring-buffer: make reentrant Steven Rostedt
2008-10-04 6:01 ` [PATCH 3/3] ftrace: make some tracers reentrant Steven Rostedt
2008-10-04 8:40 ` [PATCH 0/3] ring-buffer: less locking and only disable preemption Ingo Molnar
2008-10-04 14:34 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-10-04 14:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-04 17:41 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2008-10-04 22:27 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-10-04 23:21 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-10-06 17:10 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-10-05 10:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-06 13:53 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-10-04 16:33 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-10-04 17:18 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-10-06 17:13 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
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=20081004174121.GA1337@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=compudj@krystal.dyndns.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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