From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com> To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, x86@kernel.org, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/10] x86/entry: Move nmi entry/exit into common code Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 00:07:50 -0700 Message-ID: <20201027070750.GM534324@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <874kmk6298.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 11:50:11PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, Oct 22 2020 at 15:26, ira weiny wrote: > > > From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > > > > Lockdep state handling on NMI enter and exit is nothing specific to X86. It's > > not any different on other architectures. Also the extra state type is not > > necessary, irqentry_state_t can carry the necessary information as well. > > > > Move it to common code and extend irqentry_state_t to carry lockdep > > state. > > This lacks something like: > > [ Ira: Made the states a union as they are mutually exclusive and added > the missing kernel doc ] Fair enough. done. > > Hrm. > > > #ifndef irqentry_state > > typedef struct irqentry_state { > > - bool exit_rcu; > > + union { > > + bool exit_rcu; > > + bool lockdep; > > + }; > > } irqentry_state_t; > > #endif > > -E_NO_KERNELDOC Adding: Paul McKenney I'm happy to write something but I'm very unfamiliar with this code. So I'm getting confused what exactly exit_rcu is flagging. I can see that exit_rcu is a bad name for the state used in irqentry_nmi_[enter|exit](). Furthermore, I see why 'lockdep' is a better name. But similar lockdep handling is used in irqentry_exit() if exit_rcu is true... Given my limited knowledge; here is my proposed text: /** * struct irqentry_state - Opaque object for exception state storage * @exit_rcu: Used exclusively in the irqentry_*() calls; tracks if the * exception hit the idle task which requires special handling, * including calling rcu_irq_exit(), when the exception exits. * @lockdep: Used exclusively in the irqentry_nmi_*() calls; ensures lockdep * tracking is maintained if hardirqs were already enabled * * This opaque object is filled in by the irqentry_*_enter() functions and * should be passed back into the corresponding irqentry_*_exit() functions * when the exception is complete. * * Callers of irqentry_*_[enter|exit]() should consider this structure opaque * and all members private. Descriptions of the members are provided to aid in * the maintenance of the irqentry_*() functions. */ Perhaps Paul can enlighten me on how exit_rcu is used beyond just flagging a call to rcu_irq_exit()? Why do we call lockdep_hardirqs_off() only when in the idle task? That implies that regs_irqs_disabled() can only be false if we were in the idle task to match up the lockdep on/off calls. This does not make sense to me because why do we need the extra check for exit_rcu? I'm still trying to understand when regs_irqs_disabled() is false. } else if (!regs_irqs_disabled(regs)) { ... } else { /* * IRQ flags state is correct already. Just tell RCU if it * was not watching on entry. */ if (state.exit_rcu) rcu_irq_exit(); } Also, the comment in irqentry_enter() refers to irq_enter_from_user_mode() which does not seem to exist anymore. So I'm not sure what careful sequence it is referring to. /* * If RCU is not watching then the same careful * sequence vs. lockdep and tracing is required * as in irq_enter_from_user_mode(). */ ? Ira
next prev parent reply index Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-10-22 22:26 [PATCH 00/10] PKS: Add Protection Keys Supervisor (PKS) support ira.weiny 2020-10-22 22:26 ` [PATCH 01/10] x86/pkeys: Create pkeys_common.h ira.weiny 2020-10-22 22:26 ` [PATCH 02/10] x86/fpu: Refactor arch_set_user_pkey_access() for PKS support ira.weiny 2020-10-22 22:26 ` [PATCH 03/10] x86/pks: Enable Protection Keys Supervisor (PKS) ira.weiny 2020-10-22 22:26 ` [PATCH 04/10] x86/pks: Preserve the PKRS MSR on context switch ira.weiny 2020-10-22 22:26 ` [PATCH 05/10] x86/pks: Add PKS kernel API ira.weiny 2020-10-22 22:26 ` [PATCH 06/10] x86/entry: Move nmi entry/exit into common code ira.weiny 2020-10-23 21:50 ` Thomas Gleixner 2020-10-27 7:07 ` Ira Weiny [this message] 2020-10-27 14:18 ` Thomas Gleixner 2020-10-22 22:26 ` [PATCH 07/10] x86/entry: Pass irqentry_state_t by reference ira.weiny 2020-10-23 21:56 ` Thomas Gleixner 2020-10-27 7:11 ` Ira Weiny 2020-10-22 22:26 ` [PATCH 08/10] x86/entry: Preserve PKRS MSR across exceptions ira.weiny 2020-10-22 22:27 ` [PATCH 09/10] x86/fault: Report the PKRS state on fault ira.weiny 2020-10-22 22:27 ` [PATCH 10/10] x86/pks: Add PKS test code ira.weiny
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20201027070750.GM534324@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com \ --to=ira.weiny@intel.com \ --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \ --cc=bp@alien8.de \ --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \ --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \ --cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \ --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \ --cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \ --cc=luto@kernel.org \ --cc=mingo@redhat.com \ --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \ --cc=peterz@infradead.org \ --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \ --cc=x86@kernel.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Linux-kselftest Archive on lore.kernel.org Archives are clonable: git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/0 linux-kselftest/git/0.git # If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may # initialize and index your mirror using the following commands: public-inbox-init -V2 linux-kselftest linux-kselftest/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest \ linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org public-inbox-index linux-kselftest Example config snippet for mirrors Newsgroup available over NNTP: nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-kselftest AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git