lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] printk/tracing: Do not trace printk_nmi_enter()
On Fri, 7 Sep 2018 09:34:48 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 09:33:34PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > do_idle {
> >
> > [interrupts enabled]
> >
> > <interrupt> [interrupts disabled]
> > TRACE_IRQS_OFF [lockdep says irqs off]
> > [...]
> > TRACE_IRQS_IRET
> > test if pt_regs say return to interrupts enabled [yes]
> > TRACE_IRQS_ON [lockdep says irqs are on]
> >
> > <nmi>
> > nmi_enter() {
> > printk_nmi_enter() [traced by ftrace]
> > [ hit ftrace breakpoint ]
> > <breakpoint exception>
> > TRACE_IRQS_OFF [lockdep says irqs off]
> > [...]
> > TRACE_IRQS_IRET [return from breakpoint]
> > test if pt_regs say interrupts enabled [no]
> > [iret back to interrupt]
> > [iret back to code]
> >
> > tick_nohz_idle_enter() {
> >
> > lockdep_assert_irqs_enabled() [lockdep say no!]
>
> Isn't the problem that we muck with the IRQ state from NMI context? We
> shouldn't be doing that.

Not really. The problem is that the exception handling code jumps into
lockdep, and we allow exceptions to happen in NMIs. It's just that the
tracing of printk_nmi_enter() caused an exception before lockdep was
turned off.

>
> The thing is, since we trace the IRQ state from within IRQ-disable,
> since that's the only IRQ-safe option, it is very much not NMI-safe.
>
> Your patch might avoid the symptom, but I don't think it cures the
> fundamental problem.

No, the issue is that the nmi_enter() code was traced early which adds
breakpoints and breakpoints causes exceptions which jumps into lockdep,
and we did this before lockdep was turned off.

-- Steve

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-07 15:43    [W:0.332 / U:0.408 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site