Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 24 Sep 2021 15:59:54 -0700 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCHv2 0/5] arm64/irqentry: remove duplicate housekeeping of |
| |
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 06:36:15PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > [Adding Paul for RCU, s390 folk for entry code RCU semantics] > > On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 09:28:32PM +0800, Pingfan Liu wrote: > > After introducing arm64/kernel/entry_common.c which is akin to > > kernel/entry/common.c , the housekeeping of rcu/trace are done twice as > > the following: > > enter_from_kernel_mode()->rcu_irq_enter(). > > And > > gic_handle_irq()->...->handle_domain_irq()->irq_enter()->rcu_irq_enter() > > > > Besides redundance, based on code analysis, the redundance also raise > > some mistake, e.g. rcu_data->dynticks_nmi_nesting inc 2, which causes > > rcu_is_cpu_rrupt_from_idle() unexpected. > > Hmmm... > > The fundamental questionss are: > > 1) Who is supposed to be responsible for doing the rcu entry/exit? > > 2) Is it supposed to matter if this happens multiple times? > > For (1), I'd generally expect that this is supposed to happen in the > arch/common entry code, since that itself (or the irqchip driver) could > depend on RCU, and if that's the case thatn handle_domain_irq() > shouldn't need to call rcu_irq_enter(). That would be consistent with > the way we handle all other exceptions. > > For (2) I don't know whether the level of nesting is suppoosed to > matter. I was under the impression it wasn't meant to matter in general, > so I'm a little surprised that rcu_is_cpu_rrupt_from_idle() depends on a > specific level of nesting. > > >From a glance it looks like this would cause rcu_sched_clock_irq() to > skip setting TIF_NEED_RESCHED, and to not call invoke_rcu_core(), which > doesn't sound right, at least... > > Thomas, Paul, thoughts?
It is absolutely required that rcu_irq_enter() and rcu_irq_exit() calls be balanced. Normally, this is taken care of by the fact that irq_enter() invokes rcu_irq_enter() and irq_exit() invokes rcu_irq_exit(). Similarly, nmi_enter() invokes rcu_nmi_enter() and nmi_exit() invokes rcu_nmi_exit().
But if you are doing some special-case exception where the handler needs to use RCU readers, but where the rest of the work is not needed, then the resulting calls to rcu_irq_enter() and rcu_irq_exit() must be in the architecture-specific code and must be properly balanced.
So if exception entry invokes rcu_irq_enter() twice, then exception exit also needs to invoke rcu_irq_exit() twice.
There are some constraints on where calls to these functions are place. For example, any exception-entry code prior to the call to rcu_irq_enter() must consist solely of functions marked noinstr, but Thomas can tell you more.
Or am I missing the point of your question?
Thanx, Paul
> AFAICT, s390 will have a similar flow on its IRQ handling path, so if > this is a real issue they'll be affected too. > > Thanks, > Mark. > > > Nmi also faces duplicate accounts. This series aims to address these > > duplicate issues. > > [1-2/5]: address nmi account duplicate > > [3-4/5]: address rcu housekeeping duplicate in irq > > [5/5]: as a natural result of [3-4/5], address a history issue. [1] > > > > > > History: > > v1 -> v2: > > change the subject as the motivation varies. > > add the fix for nmi account duplicate > > > > The subject of v1 is "[PATCH 1/3] kernel/irq: __handle_domain_irq() > > makes irq_enter/exit arch optional". [2] It is brought up to fix [1]. > > > > There have been some tries to enable crash-stop-NMI on arm64, one by me, > > the other by Yuichi's [4]. I hope after this series, they can advance, > > as Marc said in [3] "No additional NMI patches will make it until we > > have resolved the issues" > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/87lfewnmdz.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de/ > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/1607912752-12481-1-git-send-email-kernelfans@gmail.com > > [3] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/afd82be798cb55fd2f96940db7be78c0@kernel.org > > [4] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20201104080539.3205889-1-ito-yuichi@fujitsu.com > > > > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> > > Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> > > Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> > > Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> > > Cc: Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com> > > Cc: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com> > > Cc: Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@arm.com> > > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > > Cc: Yuichi Ito <ito-yuichi@fujitsu.com> > > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > > > > > > Pingfan Liu (5): > > arm64/entry-common: push the judgement of nmi ahead > > irqchip/GICv3: expose handle_nmi() directly > > kernel/irq: make irq_{enter,exit}() in handle_domain_irq() arch > > optional > > irqchip/GICv3: let gic_handle_irq() utilize irqentry on arm64 > > irqchip/GICv3: make reschedule-ipi light weight > > > > arch/arm64/Kconfig | 1 + > > arch/arm64/include/asm/irq.h | 7 ++++ > > arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c | 45 +++++++++++++++------- > > arch/arm64/kernel/irq.c | 29 ++++++++++++++ > > drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c | 66 ++++++++++++++++++++------------ > > kernel/irq/Kconfig | 3 ++ > > kernel/irq/irqdesc.c | 4 ++ > > 7 files changed, 116 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-) > > > > -- > > 2.31.1 > >
| |