[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220519150026.GK2578@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 17:00:26 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>,
Alex Belits <abelits@...vell.com>,
Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenz@...nel.org>,
Xiongfeng Wang <wangxiongfeng2@...wei.com>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@...cinc.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Yu Liao <liaoyu15@...wei.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
Uladzislau Rezki <uladzislau.rezki@...y.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/21] rcu: Add a note about noinstr VS unsafe eqs
functions
On Tue, May 03, 2022 at 12:00:33PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> @@ -895,6 +899,10 @@ static void noinstr rcu_eqs_exit(bool user)
> *
> * If you add or remove a call to rcu_idle_exit(), be sure to test with
> * CONFIG_RCU_EQS_DEBUG=y.
> + *
> + * FIXME: This function should be noinstr but the below local_irq_save() is
> + * unsafe because it involves illegal RCU uses through tracing and lockdep.
> + * This must be fixed first.
> */
> void rcu_idle_exit(void)
> {
Urgh, except this one... I'm sure I fixed that at some point. Clearly
that never made it in :/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists