[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201201165321.GG1437@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 08:53:21 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT pull] locking/urgent for v5.10-rc6
On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 03:55:19PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 06:46:44AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > > So after having talked to Sven a bit, the thing that is happening, is
> > > that this is the one place where we take interrupts with RCU being
> > > disabled. Normally RCU is watching and all is well, except during idle.
> >
> > Isn't interrupt entry supposed to invoke rcu_irq_enter() at some point?
> > Or did this fall victim to recent optimizations?
>
> It does, but the problem is that s390 is still using
> trace_hardirqs_off(), which calls into tracing before RCU is enabled.
>
> The entry order between lockdep, rcu and tracing is critical.
>
> You can't call into tracing without RCU running,
> you can't call into RCU without lockdep setup,
> you can't call the (old) lockdep setup without landing in tracing.
Whew! ;-)
Thanx, Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists