[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140625051721.GG3588@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 07:17:21 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] irq_work: Implement remote queueing
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 07:12:34AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 02:33:41PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> > On 06/10/2014 09:15 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > irq work currently only supports local callbacks. However its code
> > > is mostly ready to run remote callbacks and we have some potential user.
> > >
> > > The full nohz subsystem currently open codes its own remote irq work
> > > on top of the scheduler ipi when it wants a CPU to reevaluate its next
> > > tick. However this ad hoc solution bloats the scheduler IPI.
> > >
> > > Lets just extend the irq work subsystem to support remote queuing on top
> > > of the generic SMP IPI to handle this kind of user. This shouldn't add
> > > noticeable overhead.
> >
> > I'm running next-20140624 on an ARM system, and this patch causes CPU
> > hot(un)plug to Oops for me; the following fires:
> >
> > void irq_work_run(void)
> > {
> > BUG_ON(!in_irq());
> >
> > I found that Linus's master (8b8f5d971584 "Merge tag 'compress-3.16-rc3'
> > of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/driver-core")
> > works fine. I found that this commit inside the tip(?) tree works fine
> > (478850160636 "irq_work: Implement remote queueing"). However, if I
> > merge the two together, I hit that BUG_ON.
> >
> > I think the issue is:
> >
> > This commit adds a call from
> > generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt() to irq_work_run().
> >
> > Srivatsa's patch adds a call from hotplug_cfd() to
> > flush_smp_call_function_queue() to, which I imagine happens in
> > non-interrupt context. Note that this patch moves most of the body of
> > generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt() into
> > flush_smp_call_function_queue().
>
> Right you are.. I think I'll just remove the BUG_ON(), Frederic?
Something a little so like:
---
Subject: irq_work: Remove BUG_ON in irq_work_run_list()
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Date: Wed Jun 25 07:13:07 CEST 2014
Because of a collision with 8d056c48e486 ("CPU hotplug, smp: flush any
pending IPI callbacks before CPU offline"), which ends up calling
hotplug_cfd()->flush_smp_call_function_queue()->run_irq_work(), which
is not from IRQ context.
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Reported-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
---
kernel/irq_work.c | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
--- a/kernel/irq_work.c
+++ b/kernel/irq_work.c
@@ -130,8 +130,6 @@ static void irq_work_run_list(struct lli
struct irq_work *work;
struct llist_node *llnode;
- BUG_ON(!irqs_disabled());
-
if (llist_empty(list))
return;
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists