[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120831183431.GK4259@jtriplet-mobl1>
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 11:34:31 -0700
From: Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, laijs@...fujitsu.com,
dipankar@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca, niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
peterz@...radead.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
dhowells@...hat.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com, darren@...art.com,
fweisbec@...il.com, sbw@....edu, patches@...aro.org,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paul.mckenney@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 13/15] rcu: Move TINY_PREEMPT_RCU away from
raw_local_irq_save()
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 11:56:26AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paul.mckenney@...aro.org>
>
> The use of raw_local_irq_save() is unnecessary, given that local_irq_save()
> really does disable interrupts. Also, it appears to interfere with lockdep.
> Therefore, this commit moves to local_irq_save().
It looks like the non-raw versions also include tracing, which typically
has recursive dependency problems with RCU. Can all of these call sites
safely call into tracing without recursing back into RCU?
- Josh Triplett
> Reported-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@...aro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Tested-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
> ---
> kernel/rcutiny_plugin.h | 10 +++++-----
> 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/rcutiny_plugin.h b/kernel/rcutiny_plugin.h
> index 918fd1e..3d01902 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcutiny_plugin.h
> +++ b/kernel/rcutiny_plugin.h
> @@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ static int rcu_boost(void)
> rcu_preempt_ctrlblk.exp_tasks == NULL)
> return 0; /* Nothing to boost. */
>
> - raw_local_irq_save(flags);
> + local_irq_save(flags);
>
> /*
> * Recheck with irqs disabled: all tasks in need of boosting
> @@ -287,7 +287,7 @@ static int rcu_boost(void)
> */
> if (rcu_preempt_ctrlblk.boost_tasks == NULL &&
> rcu_preempt_ctrlblk.exp_tasks == NULL) {
> - raw_local_irq_restore(flags);
> + local_irq_restore(flags);
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -317,7 +317,7 @@ static int rcu_boost(void)
> t = container_of(tb, struct task_struct, rcu_node_entry);
> rt_mutex_init_proxy_locked(&mtx, t);
> t->rcu_boost_mutex = &mtx;
> - raw_local_irq_restore(flags);
> + local_irq_restore(flags);
> rt_mutex_lock(&mtx);
> rt_mutex_unlock(&mtx); /* Keep lockdep happy. */
>
> @@ -991,9 +991,9 @@ static void rcu_trace_sub_qlen(struct rcu_ctrlblk *rcp, int n)
> {
> unsigned long flags;
>
> - raw_local_irq_save(flags);
> + local_irq_save(flags);
> rcp->qlen -= n;
> - raw_local_irq_restore(flags);
> + local_irq_restore(flags);
> }
>
> /*
> --
> 1.7.8
>
--
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