lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Mar]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Do we need to disable preemption in flush_tlb_range()?
From
Date
+CC some more folks for intc/irq insights - please see question at the bottom !

On 03/15/2018 02:39 AM, Alexey Brodkin wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On Thu, 2018-03-15 at 09:27 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 01:19:01PM -0700, Vineet Gupta wrote:
>>> +CC Peter since we have his attention ;-)
>>
>> Yeah, timezone collision there, I typically sleep at 1am ;-)
>>
>>> On 03/01/2018 07:13 AM, Alexey Brodkin wrote:
>>>> Hi Vineet,
>>>>
>>>> Just noticed that in comments for smp_call_function_many() it is said that
>>>> preemption must be disabled during its execution. And that function gets executed
>>>> among other ways like that:
>>>> -------------------------->8-----------------------
>>>> flush_tlb_range()
>>>> -> on_each_cpu_mask()
>>>> -> smp_call_function_many()
>>>> -------------------------->8-----------------------
>>>
>>> In general I prefer not to - Peter what say you ?
>>
>> The comment with smp_call_function_many() is correct, it relies on
>> preemption being disabled in a number of ways. I would expect
>> this_cpu_ptr() for example to complain when used with preemption
>> enabled (CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT).
>
> I just tried CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT and the only thing I got was that:
> -------------------------->8-----------------------
> ARC perf : 8 counters (32 bits), 32 conditions, [overflow IRQ support]
> BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [00000000] code: swapper/0/1
> caller is arc_pmu_device_probe+0x24e/0x29c
> CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 4.14.14+ #67
>
> Stack Trace:
> arc_unwind_core.constprop.1+0xd0/0xf4
> dump_stack+0x64/0x7c
> debug_smp_processor_id+0xb8/0xbc
> arc_pmu_device_probe+0x24e/0x29c
> platform_drv_probe+0x26/0x5c
> really_probe+0x288/0x338
> __driver_attach+0xc4/0xc8
> bus_for_each_dev+0x38/0x70
> bus_add_driver+0x12a/0x18c
> driver_register+0x50/0xec
> do_one_initcall+0x32/0x108
> kernel_init_freeable+0xfe/0x188
> -------------------------->8-----------------------
>
> That happens because in PMU probe routine we want to
> configure IRQ handlers on all other cores:
> -------------------------->8-----------------------
> arc_pmu_device_probe() ->
> on_each_cpu(arc_cpu_pmu_irq_init, &irq, 1): preempt_disable() ->
> enable_percpu_irq(irq, IRQ_TYPE_NONE) ->
> smp_processor_id() with disabled preemption.
> -------------------------->8-----------------------
>
> Which poses another preemption related question - how do IRQ setup on
> all cores properly? :)
>
> -Alexey
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-03-15 18:34    [W:0.062 / U:0.516 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site