From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D90EEC43142 for ; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 17:52:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 817F024CB9 for ; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 17:52:03 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 817F024CB9 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.vnet.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751795AbeFWRwB (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Jun 2018 13:52:01 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:48056 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751530AbeFWRwA (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Jun 2018 13:52:00 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098410.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w5NHmZmw105241 for ; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 13:51:59 -0400 Received: from e13.ny.us.ibm.com (e13.ny.us.ibm.com [129.33.205.203]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2jsjrf550f-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 13:51:59 -0400 Received: from localhost by e13.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 13:51:58 -0400 Received: from b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (9.57.198.29) by e13.ny.us.ibm.com (146.89.104.200) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Sat, 23 Jun 2018 13:51:54 -0400 Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.108]) by b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id w5NHprE16816008 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sat, 23 Jun 2018 17:51:53 GMT Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 785EAB2067; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 13:51:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51FD2B2065; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 13:51:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from paulmck-ThinkPad-W541 (unknown [9.85.148.28]) by b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 13:51:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: by paulmck-ThinkPad-W541 (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A0E2B16C4299; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 10:53:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2018 10:53:56 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Steven Rostedt , joel@joelfernandes.org, max.byungchul.park@gmail.com, Byungchul Park , Lai Jiangshan , Josh Triplett , Mathieu Desnoyers , LKML , kernel-team@lge.com Subject: Re: [RFC 2/2] rcu: Remove ->dynticks_nmi_nesting from struct rcu_dynticks Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20180620145814.GQ3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20180620164902.GW3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20180622055659.GA255098@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com> <20180622132843.GN3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20180622181916.GA13628@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com> <20180622205813.GV3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20180622170042.4adfbe21@gandalf.local.home> <20180622211600.GX3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 18062317-0064-0000-0000-0000031F5A6D X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00009247; HX=3.00000241; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000265; SDB=6.01051252; UDB=6.00538816; IPR=6.00829908; MB=3.00021827; MTD=3.00000008; XFM=3.00000015; UTC=2018-06-23 17:51:57 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 18062317-0065-0000-0000-000039B12265 Message-Id: <20180623175356.GH3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-06-22_03:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=941 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1806210000 definitions=main-1806230212 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 03:03:35PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 2:14 PM Paul E. McKenney > wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 05:00:42PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 13:58:13 -0700 > > > "Paul E. McKenney" wrote: > > > > > > > Something like this: > > > > > > > > IRQ entered > > > > > > > > And never exited. Ever. I actually saw this in 2011. > > > > > > I still believe this was actually a bug. And perhaps you made the RCU > > > code robust enough to handle this bug ;-) > > > > Welcome to my world! > > > > But I recall it being used in several places, so if it was a bug, it > > was an intentional bug. Probably the worst kind. > > > > Sort of like nested NMIs and interrupts within NMI handlers. ;-) > > > > > > Or something like this: > > > > > > > > IRQ exited > > > > > > > > Without a corresponding IRQ enter. > > > > > > > > The current code handles both of these situations, at least assuming > > > > that the interrupt entry/exit happens during a non-idle period. > > > > > > > > > > So why this function-call structure? Well, you see, NMI handlers can > > > > > > take what appear to RCU to be normal interrupts... > > > > > > > > > > > > (And I just added that fun fact to Requirements.html.) > > > > > > > > > > Yes, I'll definitely go through all the interrupt requirements in the doc and > > > > > thanks for referring me to it. > > > > > > > > My concern may well be obsolete. It would be good if it was! ;-) > > > > > > I'd love to mandate that irq_enter() must be paired with irq_exit(). I > > > don't really see any rationale for it to be otherwise. If there is a > > > case, perhaps it needs to be fixed. > > > > Given that the usermode helpers now look to be common code using > > workqueues, kthreads, and calls to do_execve(), it might well be that > > the days of half-interrupts are behind us. > > > > But how to actually validate this? My offer of adding a WARN_ON_ONCE() > > and waiting a few years still stands, but perhaps you have a better > > approach. > > I think you should add a WARN_ON_ONCE(). Let's get the bugs fixed. Or the obscure features identified, as the case may be. ;-) Either way, will do! Thanx, Paul