[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4CE5E849.9010406@windriver.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 11:00:25 +0800
From: DDD <dongdong.deng@...driver.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86: Avoid calling arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace()
at the same time
Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 09:50:55AM -0500, Don Zickus wrote:
>> From: Dongdong Deng <dongdong.deng@...driver.com>
>>
>> The spin_lock_debug/rcu_cpu_stall detector uses
>> trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() to dump cpu backtrace.
>> Therefore it is possible that trigger_all_cpu_backtrace()
>> could be called at the same time on different CPUs, which
>> triggers and 'unknown reason NMI' warning. The following case
>> illustrates the problem:
>>
>> CPU1 CPU2 ... CPU N
>> trigger_all_cpu_backtrace()
>> set "backtrace_mask" to cpu mask
>> |
>> generate NMI interrupts generate NMI interrupts ...
>> \ | /
>> \ | /
>>
>> The "backtrace_mask" will be cleaned by the first NMI interrupt
>> at nmi_watchdog_tick(), then the following NMI interrupts generated
>> by other cpus's arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() will be taken as
>> unknown reason NMI interrupts.
>>
>> This patch uses a test_and_set to avoid the problem, and stop the
>> arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() from calling to avoid dumping a
>> double cpu backtrace info when there is already a
>> trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() in progress.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dongdong Deng <dongdong.deng@...driver.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@...driver.com>
>> CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
>> CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
>> CC: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
>> CC: x86@...nel.org
>> CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
>> Signed-off-by: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c
>> index f349647..d892896 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c
>> @@ -27,9 +27,27 @@ u64 hw_nmi_get_sample_period(void)
>> /* For reliability, we're prepared to waste bits here. */
>> static DECLARE_BITMAP(backtrace_mask, NR_CPUS) __read_mostly;
>>
>> +/* "in progress" flag of arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace */
>> +static unsigned long backtrace_flag;
>> +
>> void arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace(void)
>> {
>> int i;
>> + unsigned long flags;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * Have to disable irq here, as the
>> + * arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() could be
>> + * triggered by "spin_lock()" with irqs on.
>> + */
>> + local_irq_save(flags);
>
>
>
> I'm not sure I understand why you disable irqs here. It looks
> safe with the test_and_set_bit already.
Hi Frederic,
Yep, after we use test_and_set_bit to replace spin_lock,
the disable irqs ops obvious could be removed here.
I will redo this patch, and send it to Don.
Thanks,
Dongdong
>
>
>
>> +
>> + if (test_and_set_bit(0, &backtrace_flag))
>> + /*
>> + * If there is already a trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() in progress
>> + * (backtrace_flag == 1), don't output double cpu dump infos.
>> + */
>> + goto out_restore_irq;
>>
>> cpumask_copy(to_cpumask(backtrace_mask), cpu_online_mask);
>>
>> @@ -42,6 +60,12 @@ void arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace(void)
>> break;
>> mdelay(1);
>> }
>> +
>> + clear_bit(0, &backtrace_flag);
>> + smp_mb__after_clear_bit();
>> +
>> +out_restore_irq:
>> + local_irq_restore(flags);
>> }
>>
>> static int __kprobes
>> --
>> 1.7.2.3
>>
>> --
>> 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/
>
>
--
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