From: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
To: Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: benh@kernel.crashing.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au, anton@samba.org,
paulus@samba.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 11/12] powerpc: Add a Kconfig and a function to set new soft_enabled mask
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 22:39:21 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160907223921.1a3936df@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9fbb7a10-13a2-8542-2050-d73a958167d7@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Mon, 5 Sep 2016 22:48:00 +0530
Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Monday 29 August 2016 07:11 AM, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 Aug 2016 00:07:27 +0530
> > Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> >> New Kconfig is added "CONFIG_IRQ_DEBUG_SUPPORT" to add a warn_on
> >> to alert the usage of soft_irq_set_mask() for disabling lower
> >> bitmask interrupts.
> >>
> >> Have also moved the code under the CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS in
> >> arch_local_irq_restore() to new Kconfig as suggested.
> >>
> >> Patch also adds a new soft_irq_set_mask() to update paca->soft_enabled.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >> ---
> >> arch/powerpc/Kconfig | 4 ++++
> >> arch/powerpc/include/asm/hw_irq.h | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> >> arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c | 4 ++--
> >> 3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
> >> index 927d2ab2ce08..878f05925340 100644
> >> --- a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
> >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
> >> @@ -51,6 +51,10 @@ config TRACE_IRQFLAGS_SUPPORT
> >> bool
> >> default y
> >>
> >> +config IRQ_DEBUG_SUPPORT
> >> + bool
> >> + default n
> >> +
> >> config LOCKDEP_SUPPORT
> >> bool
> >> default y
> >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/hw_irq.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/hw_irq.h
> >> index 415734c07cfa..9f71559ce868 100644
> >> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/hw_irq.h
> >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/hw_irq.h
> >> @@ -81,6 +81,23 @@ static inline unsigned long arch_local_irq_disable(void)
> >> return flags;
> >> }
> >>
> >> +static inline unsigned long soft_irq_set_mask(int value)
> >> +{
> >> + unsigned long flags, zero;
> >> +
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_IRQ_DEBUG_SUPPORT
> >> + WARN_ON(value <= IRQ_DISABLE_MASK_LINUX);
> >> +#endif
> >> + asm volatile(
> >> + "li %1,%3; lbz %0,%2(13); stb %1,%2(13)"
> >> + : "=r" (flags), "=&r" (zero)
> >> + : "i" (offsetof(struct paca_struct, soft_enabled)),\
> >> + "i" (value)
> >> + : "memory");
> >> +
> >> + return flags;
> >> +}
> > One other thing, if we have:
> >
> > local_irq_save(flags); // disable LINUX mask -> LINUX
> > local_irq_and_pmu_save(flags); // disable PMU mask -> LINUX|PMU
> > local_irq_and_pmu_restore(flags); // enable PMU mask -> LINUX
> > local_irq_restore(flags); // enable LINUX mask -> NONE
> >
> > Then the nested code that re-enables PMUs will not replay PMU interrupt
> > until the outer irq is re-enabled. I don't *think* this is a problem,
> > but it probably should be commented.
> >
> > Which brings us to arch_local_irq_restore() (from another patch):
> >
> >
> > @@ -208,7 +209,7 @@ notrace void arch_local_irq_restore(unsigned long en)
> >
> > /* Write the new soft-enabled value */
> > set_soft_enabled(en);
> > - if (!en)
> > + if (en == IRQ_DISABLE_MASK_LINUX)
> > return;
> > /*
> > * From this point onward, we can take interrupts, preempt,
> >
> > I think this is a bit buggy for some cases of nested disables. For the
> > above it is okay, but if we have:
> >
> > local_irq_and_pmu_save(flags);
> > local_irq_and_pmu_save(flags);
> > local_irq_and_pmu_restore(flags);
> > local_irq_and_pmu_restore(flags);
> >
> >
> > The first restore will restore LINUX|PMU mask, which will not be caught
> > by this check.
> >
> > Testing instead for non-zero (any IRQ bits masked) should work. We should
> > probably also add an IRQ_DEBUG_SUPPORT check to ensure LINUX bit is always
> > one of the outer-most bits to be cleared (theoretically we could support
>
> Just sent out the newer version of the patchset with most of the
> comments addressed.
Thanks, I'm just having a look through it.
> But I am not sure about this comment. IIUC, will something like this
> will do?
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c
> index a02c6a3bc6fa..af0c08aefbcf 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c
> @@ -209,6 +209,11 @@ notrace void arch_local_irq_restore(unsigned long en)
> unsigned char irq_happened;
> unsigned int replay;
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_IRQ_DEBUG_SUPPORT
> + WARN_ONCE (en & (en & local_paca->soft_enabled),
> + "soft_enabled transition to Unsupported state\n");
> +#endif
> +
> /* Write the new soft-enabled value */
> set_soft_enabled(en);
We want to make sure no new bits are set
WARN_ON(en & ~local_paca->soft_enabled)
My other suggestion was just to ensure the LINUX bit is enabled last:
WARN_ON(en & local_paca->soft_enabled & ~IRQ_DISABLE_MASK_LINUX)
Thanks,
Nick
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-07 12:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-28 18:37 [RFC PATCH v4 00/12] powerpc: "paca->soft_enabled" based local atomic operation implementation Madhavan Srinivasan
2016-08-28 18:37 ` [RFC PATCH v4 01/12] powerpc: Add #defs for paca->soft_enabled flags Madhavan Srinivasan
2016-08-28 18:37 ` [RFC PATCH v4 02/12] powerpc: Cleanup to use IRQ_DISABLE_MASK_* macros for paca->soft_enabled update Madhavan Srinivasan
2016-08-28 18:37 ` [RFC PATCH v4 03/12] powerpc: move set_soft_enabled() Madhavan Srinivasan
2016-08-28 18:37 ` [RFC PATCH v4 04/12] powerpc: Use set_soft_enabled api to update paca->soft_enabled Madhavan Srinivasan
2016-08-28 18:37 ` [RFC PATCH v4 05/12] powerpc: reverse the soft_enable logic Madhavan Srinivasan
2016-08-28 18:37 ` [RFC PATCH v4 06/12] powerpc: Avoid using EXCEPTION_PROLOG_1 macro in MASKABLE_* Madhavan Srinivasan
2016-08-28 18:37 ` [RFC PATCH v4 07/12] powerpc: Add new _EXCEPTION_PROLOG_1 macro Madhavan Srinivasan
2016-08-28 18:37 ` [RFC PATCH v4 08/12] powerpc: Introduce new mask bit for soft_enabled Madhavan Srinivasan
2016-08-28 18:37 ` [RFC PATCH v4 09/12] powerpc: Add "bitmask" paramater to MASKABLE_* macros Madhavan Srinivasan
2016-08-28 18:37 ` [RFC PATCH v4 10/12] powerpc: Add support to mask perf interrupts and replay Madhavan Srinivasan
2016-08-28 18:37 ` [RFC PATCH v4 11/12] powerpc: Add a Kconfig and a function to set new soft_enabled mask Madhavan Srinivasan
2016-08-29 0:23 ` Nicholas Piggin
2016-08-29 1:41 ` Nicholas Piggin
2016-08-29 5:58 ` Madhavan Srinivasan
2016-09-05 17:18 ` Madhavan Srinivasan
2016-09-05 18:01 ` Madhavan Srinivasan
2016-09-07 12:39 ` Nicholas Piggin [this message]
2016-08-28 18:37 ` [RFC PATCH v4 12/12] powerpc: rewrite local_t using soft_irq Madhavan Srinivasan
2016-08-29 1:15 ` Nicholas Piggin
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=20160907223921.1a3936df@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com \
--to=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=maddy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=paulus@samba.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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).