From: DDD <dongdong.deng@windriver.com>
To: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com, mingo@elte.hu, 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: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 13:17:55 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CBFCD03.3080600@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101018180312.GA2935@redhat.com>
Don Zickus wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 07:00:15PM +0800, DDD wrote:
>> 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:
>
> The patch seems reasonable. I can queue it up. Ingo wrote the original
> code and knows which spin locks to use better than me, perhaps he can find
> a moment to comment.
Hello Don,
Thanks for taking care and queuing this patch. :-)
Dongdong
>
> Cheers,
> Don
>
>>> 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);
>>> }
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-21 5:11 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
2010-10-18 18:03 ` Don Zickus
2010-10-21 5:17 ` DDD [this message]
-- 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=4CBFCD03.3080600@windriver.com \
--to=dongdong.deng@windriver.com \
--cc=bruce.ashfield@windriver.com \
--cc=dzickus@redhat.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