Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Thu, 31 Mar 2011 09:41:07 -0700 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: [tip:x86/urgent] x86, mce: Fix RCU lockdep from mce_poll() |
| |
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 12:03:48PM +0200, Zdenek Kabelac wrote: > However on my machine - I do not a see a difference ? > > I've this patch applied - and it still gives me the same error. > (using 6aba74f2791287ec407e0f92487a725a25908067 and this patch) > > Here are my RCU config options: > > # grep RCU .config > # RCU Subsystem > CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU=y > CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU=y > CONFIG_RCU_TRACE=y > CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT=64 > # CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT_EXACT is not set > CONFIG_TREE_RCU_TRACE=y > CONFIG_PROVE_RCU=y > # CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_REPEATEDLY is not set > # CONFIG_SPARSE_RCU_POINTER is not set > # CONFIG_RCU_TORTURE_TEST is not set > CONFIG_RCU_CPU_STALL_DETECTOR=y > CONFIG_RCU_CPU_STALL_TIMEOUT=60 > CONFIG_RCU_CPU_STALL_DETECTOR_RUNNABLE=y > CONFIG_RCU_CPU_STALL_VERBOSE=y
What idiot created that patch, anyway??? ;-)
Here is a patch that is much more likely to do something useful. Could you please test it? It is on top of the patch you just tested.
Thanx, Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
rcu: create new rcu_access_index() and use in mce
The MCE subsystem needs to sample an RCU-protected index outside of any protection for that index. If this was a pointer, we would use rcu_access_pointer(), but there is no corresponding rcu_access_index(). This commit therefore creates an rcu_access_index() and applies it to MCE.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c index a2d664f..3385ea2 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c @@ -1626,7 +1626,7 @@ out: static unsigned int mce_poll(struct file *file, poll_table *wait) { poll_wait(file, &mce_wait, wait); - if (rcu_dereference_index_check(mcelog.next, rcu_read_lock_sched_held())) + if (rcu_access_index(mcelog.next)) return POLLIN | POLLRDNORM; if (!mce_apei_read_done && apei_check_mce()) return POLLIN | POLLRDNORM; diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h index af56148..ff422d2 100644 --- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h +++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h @@ -339,6 +339,12 @@ extern int rcu_my_thread_group_empty(void); ((typeof(*p) __force __kernel *)(p)); \ }) +#define __rcu_access_index(p, space) \ + ({ \ + typeof(p) _________p1 = ACCESS_ONCE(p); \ + rcu_dereference_sparse(p, space); \ + (_________p1); \ + }) #define __rcu_dereference_index_check(p, c) \ ({ \ typeof(p) _________p1 = ACCESS_ONCE(p); \ @@ -429,6 +435,20 @@ extern int rcu_my_thread_group_empty(void); #define rcu_dereference_raw(p) rcu_dereference_check(p, 1) /*@@@ needed? @@@*/ /** + * rcu_access_index() - fetch RCU index with no dereferencing + * @p: The index to read + * + * Return the value of the specified RCU-protected index, but omit the + * smp_read_barrier_depends() and keep the ACCESS_ONCE(). This is useful + * when the value of this index is accessed, but the index is not + * dereferenced, for example, when testing an RCU-protected index against + * -1. Although rcu_access_index() may also be used in cases where + * update-side locks prevent the value of the index from changing, you + * should instead use rcu_dereference_index_protected() for this use case. + */ +#define rcu_access_index(p) __rcu_access_index((p), __rcu) + +/** * rcu_dereference_index_check() - rcu_dereference for indices with debug checking * @p: The pointer to read, prior to dereferencing * @c: The conditions under which the dereference will take place
| |