[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210216173003.GX2743@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 09:30:03 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, RCU <rcu@...r.kernel.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Daniel Axtens <dja@...ens.net>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@...eaurora.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
"Theodore Y . Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Oleksiy Avramchenko <oleksiy.avramchenko@...ymobile.com>,
mhiramat@...nel.org, rostedt@...dmis.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rcu-tasks: add RCU-tasks self tests
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 12:28:26PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2021-02-13 08:45:54 [-0800], Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Glad you like it! But let's see which (if any) of these patches solves
> > the problem for Sebastian.
>
> Looking at that, is there any reason for doing this that can not be
> solved by moving the self-test a little later? Maybe once we reached at
> least SYSTEM_SCHEDULING?
One problem is that ksoftirqd and the kprobes use are early_initcall(),
so we cannot count on ksoftirqd being spawned when kprobes first uses
synchronize_rcu_tasks(). Moving the selftest later won't fix this
problem, but rather just paper it over.
> This happens now even before lockdep is up or the console is registered.
> So if something bad happens, you end up with a blank terminal.
I was getting a splat, but I could easily believe that there are
configurations where the hang is totally silent. In other words, I do
agree that this needs a proper fix. All we need do is work out an
agreeable value of "proper". ;-)
> There is nothing else that early in the boot process that requires
> working softirq. The only exception to this is wait_task_inactive()
> which is used while starting a new thread (including the ksoftirqd)
> which is why it was moved to schedule_hrtimeout().
Moving kprobes initialization to early_initcall() [1] means that there
can be a call to synchronize_rcu_tasks() before the current spawning of
ksoftirqd. Because synchronize_rcu_tasks() needs timers to work, it needs
softirq to work. I know two straightforward ways to make that happen:
1. Spawn ksoftirqd earlier.
2. Suppress attempts to awaken ksoftirqd before it exists,
forcing all ksoftirq execution on the back of interrupts.
Uladzislau and I each produced patches for #1, and I produced a patch
for #2.
The only other option I know of is to push the call to init_kprobes()
later in the boot sequence, perhaps to its original subsys_initcall(),
or maybe only as late as core_initcall(). I added Masami and Steve on
CC for their thoughts on this.
Is there some other proper fix that I am missing?
Thanx, Paul
[1] 36dadef23fcc ("kprobes: Init kprobes in early_initcall")
Powered by blists - more mailing lists