[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170512182535.GZ3956@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2017 11:25:35 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/5] tracing: Make sure RCU is watching before
calling a stack trace
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 01:15:45PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> From: "Steven Rostedt (VMware)" <rostedt@...dmis.org>
>
> As stack tracing now requires "rcu watching", force RCU to be watching when
> recording a stack trace.
>
> Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Assuming that you never get to __trace_stack() if in an NMI handler,
this looks good to me!
In contrast, if if __trace_stack() ever is called from an NMI handler,
invoking rcu_irq_enter() can be fatal.
Thanx, Paul
> ---
> kernel/trace/trace.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace.c b/kernel/trace/trace.c
> index c4536c449021..a4208cebb42b 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace.c
> @@ -2568,7 +2568,12 @@ static inline void ftrace_trace_stack(struct trace_array *tr,
> void __trace_stack(struct trace_array *tr, unsigned long flags, int skip,
> int pc)
> {
> + if (unlikely(rcu_irq_enter_disabled()))
> + return;
> +
> + rcu_irq_enter();
> __ftrace_trace_stack(tr->trace_buffer.buffer, flags, skip, pc, NULL);
> + rcu_irq_exit();
> }
>
> /**
> --
> 2.10.2
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists