[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6adfb296-50f1-9efb-0840-cc8732b8ebf9@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2019 08:13:51 +0100
From: Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@....com>
To: Shijith Thotton <sthotton@...vell.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Jayachandran Chandrasekharan Nair <jnair@...vell.com>,
Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gkulkarni@...vell.com>,
Jan Glauber <jglauber@...vell.com>,
Robert Richter <rrichter@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] genirq: update irq stats from NMI handlers
Hi Shijith,
On 04/07/2019 05:22, Shijith Thotton wrote:
> The NMI handlers handle_percpu_devid_fasteoi_nmi() and
> handle_fasteoi_nmi() added by commit 2dcf1fbcad35 ("genirq: Provide NMI
> handlers") do not update the interrupt counts. Due to that the NMI
> interrupt count does not show up correctly in /proc/interrupts.
>
> Update the functions to fix this. With this change, we can see stats of
> the perf NMI interrupts on arm64.
>
> Fixes: 2dcf1fbcad35 ("genirq: Provide NMI handlers")
>
> Signed-off-by: Shijith Thotton <sthotton@...vell.com>
> ---
> kernel/irq/chip.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/irq/chip.c b/kernel/irq/chip.c
> index 29d6c7d070b4..88d1e054c6ea 100644
> --- a/kernel/irq/chip.c
> +++ b/kernel/irq/chip.c
> @@ -748,6 +748,8 @@ void handle_fasteoi_nmi(struct irq_desc *desc)
> unsigned int irq = irq_desc_get_irq(desc);
> irqreturn_t res;
>
> + kstat_incr_irqs_this_cpu(desc);
> +
This needs to be called with the desc lock taken, otherwise we're likely
to corrupt desc->tot_count.
But taking the desc lock is something we can't do in NMI context (
*spin_lock_irq*() won't prevent an NMI from happening).
> trace_irq_handler_entry(irq, action);
> /*
> * NMIs cannot be shared, there is only one action.
> @@ -962,6 +964,8 @@ void handle_percpu_devid_fasteoi_nmi(struct irq_desc *desc)
> unsigned int irq = irq_desc_get_irq(desc);
> irqreturn_t res;
>
> + __kstat_incr_irqs_this_cpu(desc);
> +
Looking at handle_percpu_irq(), I think this might be acceptable. But
does it make sense to only have kstats for percpu NMIs?
Cheers,
--
Julien Thierry
Powered by blists - more mailing lists