[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMj1kXHC+UCaWLRrujEJeqVaQ_4Wn3dQ+Mq+1ryQj6C=Qsb53w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2023 13:01:27 +0100
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 6.3-rc2
On Tue, 14 Mar 2023 at 12:40, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 12:18:33PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > How does the following look like as a culprit?
> >
> > 62b95a7b44d1 (ARM: 9282/1: vfp: Manipulate task VFP state with softirqs disabled)
>
> Ooh yeah, that asm implementation of local_bh_{dis,en}able completely
> miss out on the lockdep state tracking. Also I think it breaks RCU, note
> how __local_bh_disable_ip() explicitly does rcu_read_lock() for the
> first bh-disable.
>
Thanks a lot for the diagnosis, doctor :-)
I may need some hand holding getting this fixed - probably better to
run the C implementations wherever feasible, right?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists