From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
rcu@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH x86/entry: Force rcu_irq_enter() when in idle task
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 16:47:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87tuzgxrvz.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200612142621.GA8009@lenoir>
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org> writes:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 03:55:00PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> The idea of conditionally calling into rcu_irq_enter() only when RCU is
>> not watching turned out to be not completely thought through.
>>
>> Paul noticed occasional premature end of grace periods in RCU torture
>> testing. Bisection led to the commit which made the invocation of
>> rcu_irq_enter() conditional on !rcu_is_watching().
>>
>> It turned out that this conditional breaks RCU assumptions about the idle
>> task when the scheduler tick happens to be a nested interrupt. Nested
>> interrupts can happen when the first interrupt invokes softirq processing
>> on return which enables interrupts. If that nested tick interrupt does not
>> invoke rcu_irq_enter() then the nest accounting in RCU claims that this is
>> the first interrupt which might mark a quiescient state and end grace
>> periods prematurely.
>>
>> Change the condition from !rcu_is_watching() to is_idle_task(current) which
>> enforces that interrupts in the idle task unconditionally invoke
>> rcu_irq_enter() independent of the RCU state.
>>
>> This is also correct vs. user mode entries in NOHZ full scenarios because
>> user mode entries bring RCU out of EQS and force the RCU irq nesting state
>> accounting to nested. As only the first interrupt can enter from user mode
>> a nested tick interrupt will enter from kernel mode and as the nesting
>> state accounting is forced to nesting it will not do anything stupid even
>> if rcu_irq_enter() has not been invoked.
>>
>> Fixes: 3eeec3858488 ("x86/entry: Provide idtentry_entry/exit_cond_rcu()")
>> Reported-by: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>
> Acked-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
>
> So, in the end the call to rcu_irq_enter() in irq_enter() is going to
> be useless in x86, right?
x86 is not calling irq_enter() anymore. It's using irq_enter_rcu().
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-12 14:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-11 23:53 [PATCH RFC] x86/entry: Ask RCU if it needs rcu_irq_{enter,exit}() Paul E. McKenney
2020-06-11 23:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-06-12 5:30 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-06-12 12:40 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-06-12 13:55 ` [PATCH x86/entry: Force rcu_irq_enter() when in idle task Thomas Gleixner
2020-06-12 14:26 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-06-12 14:47 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2020-06-12 15:32 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-06-12 17:49 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-06-12 19:19 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-06-12 19:25 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-06-12 19:28 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-06-12 19:34 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-06-12 21:56 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-06-12 19:50 ` [tip: x86/entry] " tip-bot2 for Thomas Gleixner
2020-06-15 20:16 ` [PATCH " Joel Fernandes
2020-06-16 8:40 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-06-16 14:30 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-06-16 16:52 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-06-12 9:27 ` [PATCH RFC] x86/entry: Ask RCU if it needs rcu_irq_{enter,exit}() Thomas Gleixner
2020-06-12 13:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=87tuzgxrvz.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--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
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).