[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181107115953.cnar4u2axi4poaxe@holly.lan>
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2018 11:59:53 +0000
From: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
To: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>,
kgdb-bugreport@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] kgdb: Don't round up a CPU that failed rounding
up before
On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 05:00:27PM -0800, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> If we're using the default implementation of kgdb_roundup_cpus() that
> uses smp_call_function_single_async() we can end up hanging
> kgdb_roundup_cpus() if we try to round up a CPU that failed to round
> up before.
>
> Specifically smp_call_function_single_async() will try to wait on the
> csd lock for the CPU that we're trying to round up. If the previous
> round up never finished then that lock could still be held and we'll
> just sit there hanging.
>
> There's not a lot of use trying to round up a CPU that failed to round
> up before. Let's keep a flag that indicates whether the CPU started
> but didn't finish to round up before. If we see that flag set then
> we'll skip the next round up.
>
> In general we have a few goals here:
> - We never want to end up calling smp_call_function_single_async()
> when the csd is still locked. This is accomplished because
> flush_smp_call_function_queue() unlocks the csd _before_ invoking
> the callback. That means that when kgdb_nmicallback() runs we know
> for sure the the csd is no longer locked. Thus when we set
> "rounding_up = false" we know for sure that the csd is unlocked.
> - If there are no timeouts rounding up we should never skip a round
> up.
>
> NOTE #1: In general trying to continue running after failing to round
> up CPUs doesn't appear to be supported in the debugger. When I
> simulate this I find that kdb reports "Catastrophic error detected"
> when I try to continue. I can overrule and continue anyway, but it
> should be noted that we may be entering the land of dragons here.
It's been quite a while but AFAIR I decided to set the catastrophic
error here *because* the stuck csd lock would make restarting fragile.
So arguably we are now able to remove the code that sets this flag when
a CPU fails to round up.
> NOTE #3: setting 'kgdb_info[cpu].rounding_up = false' is in
> kgdb_nmicallback() instead of kgdb_call_nmi_hook() because some
> implementations override kgdb_call_nmi_hook(). It shouldn't hurt to
> have it in kgdb_nmicallback() in any case.
Slightly icky but I guess this is OK.
> diff --git a/kernel/debug/debug_core.c b/kernel/debug/debug_core.c
> index 23f2b5613afa..324cba8917f1 100644
> --- a/kernel/debug/debug_core.c
> +++ b/kernel/debug/debug_core.c
> @@ -246,6 +246,20 @@ void __weak kgdb_roundup_cpus(void)
> continue;
>
> csd = &per_cpu(kgdb_roundup_csd, cpu);
> +
> + /*
> + * If it didn't round up last time, don't try again
> + * since smp_call_function_single_async() will block.
> + *
> + * If rounding_up is false then we know that the
> + * previous call must have at least started and that
> + * means smp_call_function_single_async() won't block.
> + */
> + smp_mb();
Not commented and I suspect this may have no useful effect. What
(harmful) orderings does this barrier render impossible?
> + if (kgdb_info[cpu].rounding_up)
> + continue;
> + kgdb_info[cpu].rounding_up = true;
> +
> csd->func = kgdb_call_nmi_hook;
> smp_call_function_single_async(cpu, csd);
> }
> @@ -782,6 +796,9 @@ int kgdb_nmicallback(int cpu, void *regs)
> struct kgdb_state kgdb_var;
> struct kgdb_state *ks = &kgdb_var;
>
> + kgdb_info[cpu].rounding_up = false;
> + smp_mb();
Also not commented. Here I think the barrier may have a purpose (to
ensure rounding_up gets cleared before we peek at dbg_master_lock) but
if that is the case we need to comment it.
Daniel.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists