From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751207AbdBWMYk (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Feb 2017 07:24:40 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:34148 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751098AbdBWMYi (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Feb 2017 07:24:38 -0500 Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 13:24:34 +0100 From: Jiri Olsa To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Steven Rostedt , "Paul E. McKenney" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Josh Triplett , Andi Kleen , Jan Stancek Subject: Re: [BUG] msr-trace.h:42 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage! Message-ID: <20170223122434.GA20127@krava> References: <20161121005343.GB1891@krava> <20161121092850.GF3102@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161121092850.GF3102@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.29]); Thu, 23 Feb 2017 12:24:39 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 10:28:50AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 01:53:43AM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > hi, > > Jan hit following output when msr tracepoints are enabled on amd server: > > > > [ 91.585653] =============================== > > [ 91.589840] [ INFO: suspicious RCU usage. ] > > [ 91.594025] 4.9.0-rc1+ #1 Not tainted > > [ 91.597691] ------------------------------- > > [ 91.601877] ./arch/x86/include/asm/msr-trace.h:42 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage! > > [ 91.610222] > > [ 91.610222] other info that might help us debug this: > > [ 91.610222] > > [ 91.618224] > > [ 91.618224] RCU used illegally from idle CPU! > > [ 91.618224] rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 0 > > [ 91.629081] RCU used illegally from extended quiescent state! > > [ 91.634820] no locks held by swapper/1/0. > > [ 91.638832] > > [ 91.638832] stack backtrace: > > [ 91.643192] CPU: 1 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/1 Not tainted 4.9.0-rc1+ #1 > > [ 91.649457] Hardware name: empty empty/S3992, BIOS 'V2.03 ' 05/09/2008 > > [ 91.656159] ffffc900018fbdf8 ffffffff813ed43c ffff88017ede8000 0000000000000001 > > [ 91.663637] ffffc900018fbe28 ffffffff810fdcd7 ffff880233f95dd0 00000000c0010055 > > [ 91.671107] 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 ffffc900018fbe58 ffffffff814297ac > > [ 91.678560] Call Trace: > > [ 91.681022] [] dump_stack+0x85/0xc9 > > [ 91.686164] [] lockdep_rcu_suspicious+0xe7/0x120 > > [ 91.692429] [] do_trace_read_msr+0x14c/0x1b0 > > [ 91.698349] [] native_read_msr+0x32/0x40 > > [ 91.703921] [] amd_e400_idle+0x7e/0x110 > > [ 91.709407] [] arch_cpu_idle+0xf/0x20 > > [ 91.714720] [] default_idle_call+0x23/0x40 > > [ 91.720467] [] cpu_startup_entry+0x1da/0x2b0 > > [ 91.726387] [] start_secondary+0x17f/0x1f0 > > > > > > it got away with attached change.. but this rcu logic > > is far beyond me, so it's just wild guess.. ;-) > > I think I prefer something like the below, that only annotates the one > RDMSR in question, instead of all of them. > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/process.c b/arch/x86/kernel/process.c > index 0888a879120f..d6c6aa80675f 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/process.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/process.c > @@ -357,7 +357,7 @@ static void amd_e400_idle(void) > if (!amd_e400_c1e_detected) { > u32 lo, hi; > > - rdmsr(MSR_K8_INT_PENDING_MSG, lo, hi); > + RCU_NONIDLE(rdmsr(MSR_K8_INT_PENDING_MSG, lo, hi)); > > if (lo & K8_INTP_C1E_ACTIVE_MASK) { > amd_e400_c1e_detected = true; hum, I might have missed some other solution in discussion, and can't see this one being pulled in.. should I resend this? thanks, jirka