[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200211114954.GK14914@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 12:49:54 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing/perf: Move rcu_irq_enter/exit_irqson() to perf
trace point hook
On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 05:06:43PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> + if (!rcu_watching) { \
> + /* Can not use RCU if rcu is not watching and in NMI */ \
> + if (in_nmi()) \
> + return; \
> + rcu_irq_enter_irqson(); \
> + } \
I saw the same weirdness in __trace_stack(), and I'm confused by it.
How can we ever get to: in_nmi() && !rcu_watching() ? That should be a
BUG. In particular, nmi_enter() has rcu_nmi_enter().
Paul, can that really happen?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists