[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <500FD968.6000407@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 17:02:56 +0530
From: "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
CC: paulus@...ba.org, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
emachado@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, acme@...stprotocols.net,
prasad.krishnan@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 RESEND] Hardware breakpoints: Invoke __perf_event_disable()
if interrupts are already disabled
On 07/19/2012 04:46 PM, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
> On 07/18/2012 05:27 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 04:00:46PM +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
>>> Please find v2 of the patch from Prasad, based on Peter Zijlstra's
>>> feedback. This applies on top of v3.5-rc7. This has been tested and
>>> found to work fine by Edjunior.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Naveen
>>> ______
>>>
>>> From: K.Prasad <Prasad.Krishnan@...il.com>
>>>
>>> While debugging a warning message on PowerPC while using hardware
>>> breakpoints, it was discovered that when perf_event_disable is invoked
>>> through hw_breakpoint_handler function with interrupts disabled, a
>>> subsequent IPI in the code path would trigger a WARN_ON_ONCE message in
>>> smp_call_function_single function.
>>>
>>> This patch calls __perf_event_disable() when interrupts are already
>>> disabled, instead of perf_event_disable().
>>>
>>> Reported-by: Edjunior Barbosa Machado <emachado@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: K.Prasad <Prasad.Krishnan@...il.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>> include/linux/perf_event.h | 2 ++
>>> kernel/events/core.c | 2 +-
>>> kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c | 10 +++++++++-
>>> 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
>>> index 45db49f..c289ba0 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
>>> @@ -1292,6 +1292,7 @@ extern int
>>> perf_swevent_get_recursion_context(void);
>>> extern void perf_swevent_put_recursion_context(int rctx);
>>> extern void perf_event_enable(struct perf_event *event);
>>> extern void perf_event_disable(struct perf_event *event);
>>> +extern int __perf_event_disable(void *info);
>>> extern void perf_event_task_tick(void);
>>> #else
>>> static inline void
>>> @@ -1330,6 +1331,7 @@ static inline int
>>> perf_swevent_get_recursion_context(void) { return -1; }
>>> static inline void perf_swevent_put_recursion_context(int
>>> rctx) { }
>>> static inline void perf_event_enable(struct perf_event
>>> *event) { }
>>> static inline void perf_event_disable(struct perf_event
>>> *event) { }
>>> +static inline int __perf_event_disable(void *info) { }
>>> static inline void perf_event_task_tick(void) { }
>>> #endif
>>>
>>> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
>>> index d7d71d6..0ad0fc9 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
>>> @@ -1253,7 +1253,7 @@ retry:
>>> /*
>>> * Cross CPU call to disable a performance event
>>> */
>>> -static int __perf_event_disable(void *info)
>>> +int __perf_event_disable(void *info)
>>> {
>>> struct perf_event *event = info;
>>> struct perf_event_context *ctx = event->ctx;
>>> diff --git a/kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c
>>> b/kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c
>>> index bb38c4d..483f14a 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c
>>> @@ -453,7 +453,15 @@ int modify_user_hw_breakpoint(struct perf_event
>>> *bp, struct perf_event_attr *att
>>> int old_type = bp->attr.bp_type;
>>> int err = 0;
>>>
>>> - perf_event_disable(bp);
>>> + /*
>>> + * modify_user_hw_breakpoint can be invoked with IRQs disabled
>>> and hence it
>>> + * will not be possible to raise IPIs that invoke
>>> __perf_event_disable.
>>> + * So call the function directly.
>>> + */
>>> + if (irqs_disabled())
>>> + __perf_event_disable(bp);
>>> + else
>>> + perf_event_disable(bp);
>>
>> This only works if we are sure the bp is on the current CPU. Do we
>> have that guarantee?
>
> Yes. This is being hit during bp exception processing and is specific to
> ppc where we disable interrupts:
> hw_breakpoint_handler->perf_bp_event->ptrace_triggered->modify_user_hw_breakpoint()
Frederick,
Is this acceptable, or do you have other scenarios where this won't
work? I can add a check to ensure we call __perf_event_disable only if
the task is on the current CPU, but the above scenario is the only one
where we're seeing this issue.
Thanks,
Naveen
--
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