[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190111165535.467c59a3@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2019 16:55:35 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc: Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Julia Cartwright <julia@...com>, Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] Static calls
On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 15:41:22 -0600
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
> > I don’t see RCU-sched solves the problem if you don’t disable preemption. On
> > a fully preemptable kernel, you can get preempted between the push and the
> > call (jmp) or before the push. RCU-sched can then finish, and the preempted
> > task may later jump to a wrong patched-dest.
>
> Argh, I misspoke about RCU-sched. Words are hard.
>
> I meant synchronize_rcu_tasks(), which is a completely different animal.
> My understanding is that it waits until all runnable tasks (including
> preempted tasks) have gotten a chance to run.
Not quite, but does the same thing. It waits for all tasks to either
schedule voluntarily (not preempted), or be / go into idle, or be /go
into userspace. In any case, it makes sure code is off of trampolines.
I use this before freeing trampolines used by ftrace.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists