linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] rcu: Allow to eliminate softirq processing from rcutree

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: <20190321082737.t5jhdyuartimamu2@linutronix.de>
Date:   Thu, 21 Mar 2019 09:27:37 +0100
From:   Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>, tglx@...utronix.de,
        Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] rcu: Allow to eliminate softirq processing from
 rcutree

On 2019-03-20 16:46:01 [-0700], Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Thank you!  I reverted v2 and applied this one with the same sort of
> update.  Testing is going well thus far aside from my failing to add
> the required "=0" after the rcutree.use_softirq.  I will probably not
> be the only one who will run afoul of this, so I updated the commit log
> and the documentation accordingly, as shown below.

perfect, thank you.

> 							Thanx, Paul
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
> index f46b4af96ab9..b807204ffd83 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
> @@ -629,7 +609,10 @@ static void rcu_read_unlock_special(struct task_struct *t)
>  		/* Need to defer quiescent state until everything is enabled. */
>  		if (irqs_were_disabled) {
>  			/* Enabling irqs does not reschedule, so... */
> -			raise_softirq_irqoff(RCU_SOFTIRQ);
> +			if (!use_softirq)

that exclamation mark needs to go :/

> +				raise_softirq_irqoff(RCU_SOFTIRQ);
> +			else
> +				invoke_rcu_core();
>  		} else {
>  			/* Enabling BH or preempt does reschedule, so... */
>  			set_tsk_need_resched(current);

Sebastian