Thread (35 messages) 35 messages, 5 authors, 2021-10-09

Re: [PATCHv2 4/5] irqchip/GICv3: let gic_handle_irq() utilize irqentry on arm64

From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Date: 2021-09-29 09:24:08
Also in: lkml

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 04:27:11PM +0800, Pingfan Liu wrote:
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 08:20:35AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
quoted
On Wed, 29 Sep 2021 04:10:11 +0100,
Pingfan Liu [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 10:10:53AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
quoted
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 09:28:36PM +0800, Pingfan Liu wrote:
quoted
The call to rcu_irq_enter() originated from gic_handle_irq() is
redundant now, since arm64 has enter_from_kernel_mode() akin to
irqenter_entry(), which has already called rcu_irq_enter().
Here I think you're referring to the call in handle_domain_irq(), but
that isn't clear from the commit message.
Yes, and I will make it clear in V2.
quoted
quoted
Based on code analysis, the redundant can raise some mistake, e.g.
rcu_data->dynticks_nmi_nesting inc 2, which causes
rcu_is_cpu_rrupt_from_idle() unexpected.

So eliminate the call to irq_enter() in handle_domain_irq(). And
accordingly supplementing irq_enter_rcu().
We support many more irqchips on arm64, and GICv3 can be used on regular
32-bit arm, so this isn't right. Moving the irq_enter_rcu() call
into the GICv3 driver specifically breaks other drivers on arm64 by
removing the call, and breaks the GICv3 driver on arm by adding a
duplicate call.
Oops. I forgot to protect the code in GICv3 with CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_IRQENTRY
quoted
It looks like this should live in do_interrupt_handler() in
arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c, e.g.

| static void do_interrupt_handler(struct pt_regs *regs,
| 				 void (*handler)(struct pt_regs *)) 
| {
| 	irq_enter_rcu();
| 	if (on_thread_stack())
| 		call_on_irq_stack(regs, handler);
| 	else
| 		handler(regs);
| 	irq_exit_rcu();
| }

... unless there's some problem with that?
Yeah, do_interrupt_handler() is a more suitable place. But to resolve
the performance regression of rescheduling IPI [1], it is badly demanded to
distinguish irqnr before calling irq_enter_rcu() (please see 5/5 and [2]
for the context). So it is a compromise to host the code in GICv3.

Any good idea?
There is no way we are going to single out a particular interrupt
controller. As for the "regression", we'll have to look at the numbers
once we have fixed the whole infrastructure.
But I just realize that at present, gic_handle_nmi() sits behind
gic_handle_irq().  So it will make an mistaken for accounting of normal
interrupt if calling irq_enter_rcu() in do_interrupt_handler().
We can restructure entry-common.c to avoid that if necessary.

TBH, the more I see problems in this area the more I want to rip out the
pNMI bits...
And going through drivers/irqchip/irq-chip-gic*, I think there are only
two files should be handled: irq-gic.c and irq-gic-v3.c.
That are irqchips other than GICv2 and GICv3 that are used as the root
irqchip on arm64. For example, Raspberry Pi 3 uses
drivers/irqchip/irq-bcm2836.c as its root irqchip.

Thanks,
Mark.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help