From: paulmck@kernel.org
To: rcu@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com,
mingo@kernel.org, jiangshanlai@gmail.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
josh@joshtriplett.org, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org,
rostedt@goodmis.org, dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com,
fweisbec@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com, joel@joelfernandes.org,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 2/3] srcu: Avoid local_irq_save() before acquiring spinlock_t
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 17:33:32 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200623003333.26611-2-paulmck@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200623003310.GA26539@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
SRCU disables interrupts to get a stable per-CPU pointer and then
acquires the spinlock which is in the per-CPU data structure. The
release uses spin_unlock_irqrestore(). While this is correct on a non-RT
kernel, this conflicts with the RT semantics because the spinlock is
converted to a 'sleeping' spinlock. Sleeping locks can obviously not be
acquired with interrupts disabled.
Acquire the per-CPU pointer `ssp->sda' without disabling preemption and
then acquire the spinlock_t of the per-CPU data structure. The lock will
ensure that the data is consistent.
The added call to check_init_srcu_struct() is now needed because a
statically defined srcu_struct may remain uninitialized until this
point and the newly introduced locking operation requires an initialized
spinlock_t.
This change was tested for four hours with 8*SRCU-N and 8*SRCU-P without
causing any warnings.
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Cc: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Cc: rcu@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
---
kernel/rcu/srcutree.c | 14 +++++++-------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
index 8ff71e5..c100acf 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
@@ -777,14 +777,15 @@ static bool srcu_might_be_idle(struct srcu_struct *ssp)
unsigned long t;
unsigned long tlast;
+ check_init_srcu_struct(ssp);
/* If the local srcu_data structure has callbacks, not idle. */
- local_irq_save(flags);
- sdp = this_cpu_ptr(ssp->sda);
+ sdp = raw_cpu_ptr(ssp->sda);
+ spin_lock_irqsave_rcu_node(sdp, flags);
if (rcu_segcblist_pend_cbs(&sdp->srcu_cblist)) {
- local_irq_restore(flags);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore_rcu_node(sdp, flags);
return false; /* Callbacks already present, so not idle. */
}
- local_irq_restore(flags);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore_rcu_node(sdp, flags);
/*
* No local callbacks, so probabalistically probe global state.
@@ -864,9 +865,8 @@ static void __call_srcu(struct srcu_struct *ssp, struct rcu_head *rhp,
}
rhp->func = func;
idx = srcu_read_lock(ssp);
- local_irq_save(flags);
- sdp = this_cpu_ptr(ssp->sda);
- spin_lock_rcu_node(sdp);
+ sdp = raw_cpu_ptr(ssp->sda);
+ spin_lock_irqsave_rcu_node(sdp, flags);
rcu_segcblist_enqueue(&sdp->srcu_cblist, rhp);
rcu_segcblist_advance(&sdp->srcu_cblist,
rcu_seq_current(&ssp->srcu_gp_seq));
--
2.9.5
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-23 0:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-23 0:33 [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/3] SRCU updates for v5.9 Paul E. McKenney
2020-06-23 0:33 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 1/3] srcu: Fix a typo in comment "amoritized"->"amortized" paulmck
2020-06-23 0:33 ` paulmck [this message]
2020-06-23 0:33 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 3/3] srcu: Remove KCSAN stubs paulmck
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=20200623003333.26611-2-paulmck@kernel.org \
--to=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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).