public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: [RFC][PATCH 5/5] percpu: Add preempt checks back into this_cpu_read/write()
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 17:20:45 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110919212641.527742267@goodmis.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20110919212040.745370781@goodmis.org

[-- Attachment #1: 0005-percpu-Add-preempt-checks-back-into-this_cpu_read-wr.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2106 bytes --]

From: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com>

The conversion of per_cpu() and get_cpu_var() to this_cpu_read/write()
removed the debug check against using cpu variables in non atomic sections.

There are few cases where that is fine, but 99% of the time, if a per cpu
variable is going to be played with, it had better happen in an atomic
area, otherwise hard to find bugs may occur.

Right now only this_cpu_read/write() were updated. Maybe it would be a good
idea to handle the other this_cpu_*() functions as well.

Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
---
 include/linux/percpu.h |   17 +++++++++++++++--
 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/percpu.h b/include/linux/percpu.h
index 9ca008f..a4048de 100644
--- a/include/linux/percpu.h
+++ b/include/linux/percpu.h
@@ -22,6 +22,13 @@
 	 PERCPU_MODULE_RESERVE)
 #endif
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT
+# define debug_check_cpu() smp_processor_id()
+#else
+# define debug_check_cpu()
+#endif
+ 
+
 /*
  * Must be an lvalue. Since @var must be a simple identifier,
  * we force a syntax error here if it isn't.
@@ -342,7 +349,10 @@ do {									\
 # ifndef this_cpu_read_8
 #  define this_cpu_read_8(pcp)	_this_cpu_generic_read(pcp)
 # endif
-# define this_cpu_read(pcp)	__pcpu_size_call_return(this_cpu_read_, (pcp))
+# define this_cpu_read(pcp)	({					\
+			debug_check_cpu();				\
+			__pcpu_size_call_return(this_cpu_read_, (pcp));	\
+		})
 #endif
 
 #define _this_cpu_generic_to_op(pcp, val, op)				\
@@ -365,7 +375,10 @@ do {									\
 # ifndef this_cpu_write_8
 #  define this_cpu_write_8(pcp, val)	_this_cpu_generic_to_op((pcp), (val), =)
 # endif
-# define this_cpu_write(pcp, val)	__pcpu_size_call(this_cpu_write_, (pcp), (val))
+# define this_cpu_write(pcp, val)	({				\
+			debug_check_cpu();				\
+			__pcpu_size_call(this_cpu_write_, (pcp), (val)); \
+		})
 #endif
 
 #ifndef this_cpu_add
-- 
1.7.5.4



  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-09-19 21:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 73+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-09-19 21:20 [RFC][PATCH 0/5] Introduce checks for preemptable code for this_cpu_read/write() Steven Rostedt
2011-09-19 21:20 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/5] x86: Remove const_udelay() caring about which cpu var it uses Steven Rostedt
2011-09-19 21:51   ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-19 23:31     ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-19 21:20 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/5] mm: Switch mod_state() to __this_cpu_read() Steven Rostedt
2011-09-19 22:02   ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-19 23:48     ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 14:46       ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 15:16         ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 15:54           ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 16:07             ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 22:19             ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2011-09-20 13:49     ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-09-20 14:01       ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 14:51       ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 15:11         ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 15:59           ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 16:03             ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 16:07               ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 15:27         ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-09-20 16:02           ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 16:51             ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-09-20 17:08               ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-19 21:20 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/5] memcg: Disable preemption in memcg_check_events() Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 14:20   ` Johannes Weiner
2011-09-20 14:24     ` Johannes Weiner
2011-09-20 14:33       ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-24  0:46   ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-19 21:20 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/5] printk: Have wake_up_klogd() use __this_cpu_write() Steven Rostedt
2011-09-19 21:54   ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-19 23:33     ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 14:54       ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 14:55         ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-19 21:20 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2011-09-19 21:49 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/5] Introduce checks for preemptable code for this_cpu_read/write() Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20  3:06   ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 12:44     ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2011-09-20 13:51       ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-09-20 14:58         ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 15:17           ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 14:57       ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 15:19         ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 16:08           ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 16:31             ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 16:56               ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 17:09                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-20 17:15                   ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 17:25                     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2011-09-20 18:03                       ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 18:12                         ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2011-09-20 18:27                           ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 18:34                             ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2011-09-20 22:32             ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2011-09-20 22:17           ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2011-09-21  1:33             ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 15:46     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2011-09-20 16:00       ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 16:10         ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 16:50           ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-20 18:54           ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-21 15:16             ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-21 15:31               ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-21 15:59                 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-21 16:12                   ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-21 16:32               ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-09-20  2:20 ` Andi Kleen
2011-09-20  3:12   ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20  3:17     ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20  8:32     ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-09-20 12:10       ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 15:03       ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 15:07         ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-20 16:05           ` Christoph Lameter

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=20110919212641.527742267@goodmis.org \
    --to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tj@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