[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100119085811.GA5145@nowhere>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 09:58:15 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf_event: fix race in
perf_swevent_get_recursion_context()
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 09:19:43AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>
>
> Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 09:42:34PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> It only disable preemption in perf_swevent_get_recursion_context()
> >> it can't avoid race of hard-irq and NMI
> >>
> >> In this patch, we use atomic operation to avoid it and reduce
> >> cpu_ctx->recursion size, it also make this patch no need diable
> >> preemption
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com>
> >
> >
> >
> > I don't understand what is racy in what we have currently.
> >
>
> It's because hard-irq(we can handle interruption with interruption enabled)
> and NMI are nested, for example:
>
> int perf_swevent_get_recursion_context(void)
> {
> ......
> if (cpuctx->recursion[rctx]) {
> put_cpu_var(perf_cpu_context);
> return -1;
> }
>
> /*
> * Another interruption handler/NMI will re-enter there if it
> * happed, it make the recursion value chaotic
> */
> cpuctx->recursion[rctx]++;
> ......
I still don't understand the problem.
It's not like a fight between different cpus, it's a local per cpu
fight.
NMIs can't nest other NMIs but hardirq can nest another hardirqs,
we don't care much about these though.
So let's imagine the following sequence, a fight between nested
hardirqs:
cpuctx->recursion[irq] initially = 0
Interrupt (level 0):
if (cpuctx->recursion[rctx]) {
put_cpu_var(perf_cpu_context);
return -1;
}
Interrupt (level 1):
cpuctx->recursion[rctx]++; // = 1
...
do something
...
cpuctx->recursion[rctx]--; // = 0
End Interrupt (level 1)
cpuctx->recursion[rctx]++; // = 1
...
do something
...
cpuctx->recursion[rctx]--; // = 0
End interrupt (level 0)
Another sequence could be Interrupt level 0 has
already incremented recursion and we are interrupted by
irq level 1 which then won't be able to get the recursion
context. But that's not a big deal I think.
> > This looks broken. We don't call back perf_swevent_put_recursion_context
> > in fail case, so the bit won't ever be cleared once we recurse.
> >
>
> Um, i think we can't clear the bit in this fail case, consider below
> sequence:
>
> path A: path B
>
> set bit but find the bit already set
> atomic set bit |
> | |
> V |
> handle SW event |
> | V
> V exit and not clear the bit
> atomic clear bit
>
> After A and B, the bit is still zero
>
> Right? :-)
Ah indeed, it will be cleared by the interrupted path.
I still don't understand what this patch brings us though.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists