Re: [PATCH v2 04/24] arm64/cpu: Mark cpu_die() __noreturn

From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: "Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <philmd@linaro.org>
Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jgross@suse.com,
	richard.henderson@linaro.org, ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru,
	mattst88@gmail.com, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org,
	linux@armlinux.org.uk, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, guoren@kernel.org,
	linux-csky@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
	chenhuacai@kernel.org, kernel@xen0n.name,
	loongarch@lists.linux.dev, f.fainelli@gmail.com,
	bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com, tsbogend@alpha.franken.de,
	linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, jiaxun.yang@flygoat.com,
	mpe@ellerman.id.au, npiggin@gmail.com,
	christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	ysato@users.sourceforge.jp, dalias@libc.org,
	linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net,
	sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com,
	bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org,
	hpa@zytor.com, chris@zankel.net, jcmvbkbc@gmail.com,
	linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, peterz@infradead.org,
	juri.lelli@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
	dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
	bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de, bristot@redhat.com,
	vschneid@redhat.com, paulmck@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/24] arm64/cpu: Mark cpu_die() __noreturn
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2023 13:09:21 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y+zZgZIP7RPIgyQf@FVFF77S0Q05N> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <14274f04-2991-95bd-c29b-07e86e8755c1@linaro.org>

On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 09:13:08AM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On 14/2/23 08:05, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > cpu_die() doesn't return.  Annotate it as such.  By extension this also
> > makes arch_cpu_idle_dead() noreturn.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >   arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h | 2 +-
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h
> > index fc55f5a57a06..5733a31bab08 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h
> > @@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ static inline void arch_send_wakeup_ipi_mask(const struct cpumask *mask)
> >   extern int __cpu_disable(void);
> >   extern void __cpu_die(unsigned int cpu);
> > -extern void cpu_die(void);
> > +extern void __noreturn cpu_die(void);
> >   extern void cpu_die_early(void);
> 
> Shouldn't cpu_operations::cpu_die() be declared noreturn first?

The cpu_die() function ends with a BUG(), and so does not return, even if a
cpu_operations::cpu_die() function that it calls erroneously returned.

We *could* mark cpu_operations::cpu_die() as noreturn, but I'd prefer that we
did not so that the compiler doesn't optimize away the BUG() which is there to
catch such erroneous returns.

That said, could we please add __noreturn to the implementation of cpu_die() in
arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c? i.e. the fixup below.

With that fixup:

Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>

Mark.

---->8----

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
index ffc5d76cf695..a98a76f7c1c6 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
@@ -361,7 +361,7 @@ void __cpu_die(unsigned int cpu)
  * Called from the idle thread for the CPU which has been shutdown.
  *
  */
-void cpu_die(void)
+void __noreturn cpu_die(void)
 {
        unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
        const struct cpu_operations *ops = get_cpu_ops(cpu);
