The Linux Kernel Mailing List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Wladislav Wiebe <wladislav.wiebe@nokia.com>,
	anna-maria@linutronix.de, frederic@kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, bigeasy@linutronix.de,
	peterz@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	wladislav.wiebe@nokia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irq: add support for warning on long-running IRQ handlers
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2025 17:42:04 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <875xgdnsmr.ffs@tglx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250630124721.18232-1-wladislav.wiebe@nokia.com>

On Mon, Jun 30 2025 at 14:46, Wladislav Wiebe wrote:

The subsystem prefix is 'genirq:' See

https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/maintainer-tip.html#patch-subject

> Introduce a new option CONFIG_IRQ_LATENCY_WARN that enables warnings when
> IRQ handlers take an unusually long time to execute.
>
> When triggered, the warning includes the CPU, IRQ number, handler address,
> name, and execution duration, for example:
>
>   [CPU0] latency on IRQ[787:bad_irq_handler+0x1/0x34 [bad_irq]], took: 5 jiffies (~50 ms)
>
> To keep runtime overhead minimal, this implementation uses a jiffies-based
> timing mechanism. While coarse, it is sufficient to detect problematic IRQs.

Define sufficient. That really depends on your use case. For a real-time
system a hard interrupt handler running longer than a few microseconds
can be problematic.

So instead of adding some single purpose mechanism, can we please add
something flexible which can be used for a wide range of scenarios.

> +#ifdef CONFIG_IRQ_LATENCY_WARN
> +static inline void warn_on_irq_latency(struct irqaction *action, unsigned int irq,
> +				       unsigned long jiffies_start)

latency is the wrong term here. This is about the runtime, duration of
the handler.

> +{
> +	unsigned long delta = jiffies - jiffies_start;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Warn about long IRQ handler latency only if jiffies are reliable.

What means jiffies are reliable?

> +	 * The reporting condition hits only when there are at least two CPUs
> +	 * with active ticks.
> +	 * Jiffies updates are stalled on this CPU until MAX_STALLED_JIFFIES
> +	 * reaches and a force update happens on another CPU with active ticks.
> +	 */
> +	if (unlikely(delta >= (MAX_STALLED_JIFFIES + CONFIG_IRQ_LATENCY_WARN_THRESHOLD))) {
> +		pr_warn_ratelimited("[CPU%d] latency on IRQ[%u:%pS], took: %lu jiffies (~%u ms)\n",
> +				    smp_processor_id(), irq, action->handler,
> +				    delta, jiffies_to_msecs(delta));
> +	}
> +}
> +#else
> +static inline void warn_on_irq_latency(struct irqaction *action, unsigned int irq,
> +				       unsigned long jiffies_start) { }
> +#endif

I'm absolutely not fond of this #ifdeffery and yet more Kconfig
knobs. Something like this should just work:

DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(handler_duration_check);

        if (static_branch_unlikely(&handler_duration_check))
		ts_start = local_clock();
	res = action->handler(irq, action->dev_id);
        if (static_branch_unlikely(&handler_duration_check))
		check_handler_duration(ts_start);

Then have a command-line option which allows the user to set a warning
threshold > 0 in microseconds. When the option is evaluated the
threshold is stored in a __ro_after_init variable and the static branch
is enabled.

Hmm?

Thanks,

        tglx

  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-06-30 15:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-30 12:46 [PATCH] irq: add support for warning on long-running IRQ handlers Wladislav Wiebe
2025-06-30 13:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-30 13:59   ` Wladislav Wiebe
2025-07-02  9:06     ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-07-02  9:14       ` Wladislav Wiebe
2025-06-30 15:42 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2025-07-01  6:10   ` Wladislav Wiebe
2025-07-01  7:37     ` Thomas Gleixner
2025-07-15  8:23       ` Wladislav Wiebe

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=875xgdnsmr.ffs@tglx \
    --to=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=anna-maria@linutronix.de \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=wladislav.wiebe@nokia.com \
    /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