Re: [PATCH v2 3/9] rcu,tracing: Create trace_rcu_{enter,exit}()
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Date: 2020-02-18 20:40:43
Also in:
lkml
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 12:17:28PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 08:58:31PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:quoted
On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 03:44:44PM -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:quoted
quoted
quoted
That _should_ already be the case today. That is, if we end up in a tracer and in_nmi() is unreliable we're already screwed anyway.quoted
I removed the static from rcu_nmi_enter()/exit() as it is called from outside, that makes it build now. Updated below is Paul's diff. I also added NOKPROBE_SYMBOL() to rcu_nmi_exit() to match rcu_nmi_enter() since it seemed asymmetric.quoted
+__always_inline void rcu_nmi_exit(void) { struct rcu_data *rdp = this_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data);@@ -651,25 +653,15 @@ static __always_inline void rcu_nmi_exit_common(bool irq) trace_rcu_dyntick(TPS("Startirq"), rdp->dynticks_nmi_nesting, 0, atomic_read(&rdp->dynticks)); WRITE_ONCE(rdp->dynticks_nmi_nesting, 0); /* Avoid store tearing. */ - if (irq) + if (!in_nmi()) rcu_prepare_for_idle(); rcu_dynticks_eqs_enter(); - if (irq) + if (!in_nmi()) rcu_dynticks_task_enter(); }Boris and me have been going over the #MC code (and finding loads of 'interesting' code) and ran into ist_enter(), whish has the following code: /* * We might have interrupted pretty much anything. In * fact, if we're a machine check, we can even interrupt * NMI processing. We don't want in_nmi() to return true, * but we need to notify RCU. */ rcu_nmi_enter(); Which, to me, sounds all sorts of broken. The IST (be it #DB or #MC) can happen while we're holding all sorts of locks. This must be an NMI-like context.Ouch! Looks like I need to hold off on getting rid of the "irq" parameters if in_nmi() isn't going to be accurate.
I'm currently trying to twist my brain around all this, because I suspect it's all completely broken one way or another. But yes, we definitely need to fix this before your patch goes in.