linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH/RESEND] ARM: arch_timer: Silence debug preempt warnings

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5179767F.5030405@codeaurora.org>
Date:	Thu, 25 Apr 2013 11:31:27 -0700
From:	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To:	arm@...nel.org
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RESEND] ARM: arch_timer: Silence debug preempt warnings

On 04/17/13 16:26, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Hot-plugging with CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT=y on a device with arm
> architected timers causes a slew of "using smp_processor_id() in
> preemptible" warnings:
>
>   BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [00000000] code: sh/111
>   caller is arch_timer_cpu_notify+0x14/0xc8
>
> This happens because sometimes the cpu notifier,
> arch_timer_cpu_notify(), is called in preemptible context and
> other times in non-preemptible context but we use this_cpu_ptr()
> to retrieve the clockevent in all cases. We're only going to
> actually use the pointer in non-preemptible context though, so
> push the this_cpu_ptr() access down into the cases to force the
> checks to occur only in non-preemptible contexts.
>
> Cc: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> Acked-by: Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@....com>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
> ---
>
> Resending to arm-soc maintainers instead of timekeeping maintainers. Who
> maintains this driver?

Ping.

>
>  drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c | 10 ++++++----
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> index d7ad425..a65a710 100644
> --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> @@ -248,14 +248,16 @@ static void __cpuinit arch_timer_stop(struct clock_event_device *clk)
>  static int __cpuinit arch_timer_cpu_notify(struct notifier_block *self,
>  					   unsigned long action, void *hcpu)
>  {
> -	struct clock_event_device *evt = this_cpu_ptr(arch_timer_evt);
> -
> +	/*
> +	 * Grab cpu pointer in each case to avoid spurious
> +	 * preemptible warnings
> +	 */
>  	switch (action & ~CPU_TASKS_FROZEN) {
>  	case CPU_STARTING:
> -		arch_timer_setup(evt);
> +		arch_timer_setup(this_cpu_ptr(arch_timer_evt));
>  		break;
>  	case CPU_DYING:
> -		arch_timer_stop(evt);
> +		arch_timer_stop(this_cpu_ptr(arch_timer_evt));
>  		break;
>  	}
>  


-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation

--
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/