[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200212100940.GD14914@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 11:09:40 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, linux@...linux.org.uk
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, joel@...lfernandes.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, gustavo@...eddedor.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, paulmck@...nel.org, josh@...htriplett.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, jiangshanlai@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] tracing vs rcu vs nmi
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 10:32:10AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> These here patches are the result of Mathieu and Steve trying to get commit
> 865e63b04e9b2 ("tracing: Add back in rcu_irq_enter/exit_irqson() for rcuidle
> tracepoints") reverted again.
>
> One of the things discovered is that tracing MUST NOT happen before nmi_enter()
> or after nmi_exit(). I've only fixed x86, but quickly gone through other
> architectures and there is definitely more stuff to be fixed (simply grep for
> nmi_enter in your arch).
Someone should probably look at the whole ARM FiQ stuff, I got a little
lost, but probably handle_fiq_as_nmi() wants notrace and everything
using set_fiq_handler() wants looking at.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists