From: DDD <dongdong.deng@windriver.com>
To: tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com, mingo@elte.hu
Cc: Dongdong Deng <dongdong.deng@windriver.com>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
bruce.ashfield@windriver.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: avoid calling arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() at the same time on SMP
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 19:00:15 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CBC28BF.4090203@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1286793111-27579-1-git-send-email-dongdong.deng@windriver.com>
CC to Ingo's mingo@elte.hu and add some code explains for this patch.
Dongdong
Dongdong Deng wrote:
> The spin_lock_debug/rcu_cpu_stall detector uses
> trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() to dump cpu backtrace.
> Therefore it is possible that trigger_all_cpu_backtrace()
> could be called at the same time on different CPUs, which
> triggers and 'unknown reason NMI' warning. The following case
> illustrates the problem:
>
> CPU1 CPU2 ... CPU N
> trigger_all_cpu_backtrace()
> set "backtrace_mask" to cpu mask
> |
> generate NMI interrupts generate NMI interrupts ...
> \ | /
> \ | /
> The "backtrace_mask" will be cleaned by the first NMI interrupt
> at nmi_watchdog_tick(), then the following NMI interrupts generated
> by other cpus's arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() will be took as
> unknown reason NMI interrupts.
>
> This patch uses a lock to avoid the problem, and stop the
> arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() calling to avoid dumping double cpu
> backtrace info when there is already a trigger_all_cpu_backtrace()
> in progress.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dongdong Deng <dongdong.deng@windriver.com>
> Reviewed-by: Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@windriver.com>
> CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
> CC: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
> CC: x86@kernel.org
> CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> arch/x86/kernel/apic/nmi.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c
> index cefd694..3aea0a5 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c
> @@ -29,6 +29,16 @@ u64 hw_nmi_get_sample_period(void)
> void arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace(void)
> {
> int i;
> + static arch_spinlock_t lock = __ARCH_SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED;
Why an arch spin lock vs just using a raw spin lock?
for example. static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(lock);
The spin_lock_debug detector was used in raw_spinlock too.
arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() -->
raw_spin_lock(lock) -->
_raw_spin_lock(lock) -->
__raw_spin_lock(lock) -->
do_raw_spin_lock(lock) -->
__spin_lock_debug(lock) -->
trigger_all_cpu_backtrace()
Therefor, we have to use arch spin lock here.
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + local_irq_save(flags);
Why have to save the irq's here?
When the arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() was triggered by
"spin_lock()"'s spin_lock_debug detector, it is possible that
the irq is enabled, thus we have to save and disable it here.
> + if (!arch_spin_trylock(&lock))
> + /*
> + * If there is already a trigger_all_cpu_backtrace()
> + * in progress, don't output double cpu dump infos.
> + */
> + goto out_restore_irq;
>
> cpumask_copy(to_cpumask(backtrace_mask), cpu_online_mask);
>
> @@ -41,6 +51,10 @@ void arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace(void)
> break;
> mdelay(1);
> }
> +
> + arch_spin_unlock(&lock);
> +out_restore_irq:
> + local_irq_restore(flags);
> }
>
> static int __kprobes
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/nmi.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/nmi.c
> index a43f71c..5fa8a13 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/nmi.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/nmi.c
> @@ -552,6 +552,16 @@ int do_nmi_callback(struct pt_regs *regs, int cpu)
> void arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace(void)
> {
> int i;
> + static arch_spinlock_t lock = __ARCH_SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED;
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + local_irq_save(flags);
> + if (!arch_spin_trylock(&lock))
> + /*
> + * If there is already a trigger_all_cpu_backtrace()
> + * in progress, don't output double cpu dump infos.
> + */
> + goto out_restore_irq;
>
> cpumask_copy(to_cpumask(backtrace_mask), cpu_online_mask);
>
> @@ -564,4 +574,8 @@ void arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace(void)
> break;
> mdelay(1);
> }
> +
> + arch_spin_unlock(&lock);
> +out_restore_irq:
> + local_irq_restore(flags);
> }
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-18 10:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-11 10:31 [PATCH] x86: avoid calling arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() at the same time on SMP Dongdong Deng
2010-10-18 11:00 ` DDD [this message]
2010-10-18 18:03 ` Don Zickus
2010-10-21 5:17 ` DDD
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-11-02 18:16 Don Zickus
2010-11-10 7:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-11-10 8:35 ` DDD
2010-11-10 8:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-11-11 2:20 Dongdong Deng
2010-11-11 9:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-11-11 9:51 ` DDD
2010-11-11 10:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-11-11 11:00 ` DDD
2010-11-11 9:51 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-11-11 9:57 ` Ingo Molnar
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=4CBC28BF.4090203@windriver.com \
--to=dongdong.deng@windriver.com \
--cc=bruce.ashfield@windriver.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@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