| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20120904233344.GB11855@jtriplet-mobl1>
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2012 16:33:44 -0700
From: Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, 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,
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 04/15] rcu: Permit RCU_NONIDLE() to be used
from interrupt context
On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 07:23:51PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-09-04 at 16:08 -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 06:51:22PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2012-09-04 at 15:33 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 11:00:52AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 11:56:17AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > > > From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paul.mckenney@...aro.org>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There is a need to use RCU from interrupt context, but either before
> > > > > > rcu_irq_enter() is called or after rcu_irq_exit() is called. If the
> > > > > > interrupt occurs from idle, then lockdep-RCU will complain about such
> > > > > > uses, as they appear to be illegal uses of RCU from the idle loop.
> > > > > > In other environments, RCU_NONIDLE() could be used to properly protect
> > > > > > the use of RCU, but RCU_NONIDLE() currently cannot be invoked except
> > > > > > from process context.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This commit therefore modifies RCU_NONIDLE() to permit its use more
> > > > > > globally.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Reported-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@...aro.org>
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > Something seems wrong about this. The addition of EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL
> > > > > suggests that such interrupt handlers might live in modules. In what
> > > > > situation might a module interrupt handler get called from the idle
> > > > > loop, before rcu_irq_enter or after rcu_irq_exit, and need to know that
> > > > > when using RCU?
> > > >
> > > > Drivers can be in modules, in which case their interrupt handlers will
> > > > also be in the corresponding module. I do agree that in most cases,
> > > > the irq_enter() and irq_exit() hooks would be invoked by non-module code,
> > > > but I do believe that I had to add those exports due to build failures.
> > > >
> > > > Steven will let me know if I am confused on this point.
> > > >
> > >
> > > You're not confused, the situation is confusing :-/
> > >
> > > Because some trace events happen inside the idle loop after rcu has
> > > "shutdown", we needed to create "trace_foo_rcuidle()" handlers that can
> > > handle this condition. That is, for every trace_foo() static inline
> > > (used at the tracepoint location), there exists a static inline
> > > trace_foo_rcuidle(), that looks something like this:
> > >
> > > static inline void trace_##name##_rcuidle(proto) {
> > > if (static_key_false(&__tracepoint_##name.key)) {
> > > rcu_idle_exit();
> > > __DO_TRACE();
> > > rcu_idle_enter();
> > > }
> > > }
> > >
> > > Although these calls are never used by module code, because they are
> > > static inlines, they are still defined for all tracepoints, kernel
> > > tracepoints as well as module tracepoints. And thus, need the export :-(
> >
> > Fair enough.
> >
> > What about having the tracepoint code generation detect when building as
> > part of a module via defined(MODULE), and omit the unused _rcuidle
> > versions in those cases? That would avoid the need to export those
> > functions at all. Strawman patch (not tested):
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/tracepoint.h b/include/linux/tracepoint.h
> > index 802de56..41e1ef2 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/tracepoint.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/tracepoint.h
> > @@ -136,6 +136,22 @@ static inline void tracepoint_synchronize_unregister(void)
> > postrcu; \
> > } while (0)
> >
> > +#ifdef MODULE
> > +#define __DECLARE_TRACE_RCU(name, proto, args, cond, data_proto, data_args) \
> > + static inline void trace_##name##_rcuidle(proto) \
> > + { \
> > + if (static_key_false(&__tracepoint_##name.key)) \
> > + __DO_TRACE(&__tracepoint_##name, \
> > + TP_PROTO(data_proto), \
> > + TP_ARGS(data_args), \
> > + TP_CONDITION(cond), \
> > + rcu_idle_exit(), \
> > + rcu_idle_enter()); \
> > + }
> > +#else
> > +#define __DECLARE_TRACE_RCU(name, proto, args, cond, data_proto, data_args)
> > +#endif
> > +
>
> Egad! More macros on top of macros! Yeah I know I'm the most guilty of
> this, but it just seems to add one more indirection that I would like to
> avoid.
This doesn't seem to add a significant amount of complexity; it forwards
exactly the same parameters to the helper macro, and just moves the one
function definition there and makes it conditional. This still seems
more preferable than exporting functions just so they won't get called.
> > /*
> > * Make sure the alignment of the structure in the __tracepoints section will
> > * not add unwanted padding between the beginning of the section and the
> > @@ -151,16 +167,7 @@ static inline void tracepoint_synchronize_unregister(void)
> > TP_ARGS(data_args), \
> > TP_CONDITION(cond),,); \
> > } \
> > - static inline void trace_##name##_rcuidle(proto) \
> > - { \
> > - if (static_key_false(&__tracepoint_##name.key)) \
> > - __DO_TRACE(&__tracepoint_##name, \
> > - TP_PROTO(data_proto), \
> > - TP_ARGS(data_args), \
> > - TP_CONDITION(cond), \
> > - rcu_idle_exit(), \
> > - rcu_idle_enter()); \
> > - } \
> > + __DECLARE_TRACE_RCU(name, proto, args, cond, data_proto, data_args) \
> > static inline int \
> > register_trace_##name(void (*probe)(data_proto), void *data) \
> > { \
> >
> >
> > If that doesn't work out, please consider adding an explicit comment
> > saying why you exported the functions.
> >
>
> Or, we could also add in include/linux/rcupdate.h:
>
> #ifdef MODULE
> static inline void rcu_idle_enter(void) {
> panic("Don't call me from modules");
> }
> static inline void rcu_idle_exit(void) {
> panic("Don't call me from modules");
> }
> #else
> extern void rcu_idle_enter(void);
> extern void rcu_idle_exit(void);
> #endif
I could live with that; it seems preferable to unnecessary exports,
though it still seems much uglier to me than the conditional definition
of trace_*_rcuidle. :)
- Josh Triplett
--
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