[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFA6WYNEuZK9OCchj1Na-yZ08ahQe+B=iGCuytqXz5XhUie=gA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2023 10:49:12 +0530
From: Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>
To: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, ito-yuichi@...itsu.com,
Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
kgdb-bugreport@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Masayoshi Mizuma <msys.mizuma@...il.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Lecopzer Chen <lecopzer.chen@...iatek.com>,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...il.com>,
Ben Dooks <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
"Gautham R. Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@....com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
Wei Li <liwei391@...wei.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 0/7] arm64: Add debug IPI for backtraces / kgdb; try to
use NMI for it
Hi Doug,
On Fri, 2 Jun 2023 at 03:07, Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> This is an attempt to resurrect Sumit's old patch series [1] that
> allowed us to use the arm64 pseudo-NMI to get backtraces of CPUs and
> also to round up CPUs in kdb/kgdb. The last post from Sumit that I
> could find was v7, so I started my series at v8. I haven't copied all
> of his old changelongs here, but you can find them from the link.
>
> I'm really looking for a way to land this patch series. In response to
> v8, Mark Rutland indicated [2] that he was worried about the soundness
> of pseudo NMI. Those definitely need to get fixed, but IMO this patch
> series could still land in the meantime. That would at least let
> people test with it.
+1
>
> Request for anyone reading this: please help indicate your support of
> this patch series landing by replying, even if you don't have the
> background for a full review. My suspicion is that there are a lot of
> people who agree that this would be super useful to get landed.
>
You can ofcourse count me in here. This will certainly bring NMI
debugging capabilities to arm64 and I have been advocating for that
since the advent of pseudo NMIs on arm64.
> Since v8, I have cleaned up this patch series by integrating the 10th
> patch from v8 [3] into the whole series. As part of this, I renamed
> the "NMI IPI" to the "debug IPI" since it could now be backed by a
> regular IPI in the case that pseudo NMIs weren't available. With the
> fallback, this allowed me to drop some extra patches from the
> series. This feels (to me) to be pretty clean and hopefully others
> agree. Any patch I touched significantly I removed Masayoshi and
> Chen-Yu's tags from.
>
> ...also in v8, I reorderd the patches a bit in a way that seemed a
> little cleaner to me.
This cleanup looks good to me.
-Sumit
>
> Since v7, I have:
> * Addressed the small amount of feedback that was there for v7.
> * Rebased.
> * Added a new patch that prevents us from spamming the logs with idle
> tasks.
> * Added an extra patch to gracefully fall back to regular IPIs if
> pseudo-NMIs aren't there.
>
> It can be noted that this patch series works very well with the recent
> "hardlockup" patches that have landed through Andrew Morton's tree and
> are currently in linuxnext. It works especially well with the "buddy"
> lockup detector.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/1604317487-14543-1-git-send-email-sumit.garg@linaro.org/
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/ZFvGqD%2F%2Fpm%2FlZb+p@FVFF77S0Q05N.cambridge.arm.com/
> [3] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230419155341.v8.10.Ic3659997d6243139d0522fc3afcdfd88d7a5f030@changeid/
>
> Changes in v9:
> - Add a warning if we don't have enough IPIs for the NMI IPI
> - Added comments that we might not be using NMI always.
> - Added missing "inline"
> - Added to commit message that this doesn't catch all cases.
> - Fold in v8 patch #10 ("Fallback to a regular IPI if NMI isn't enabled")
> - Moved header file out of "include" since it didn't need to be there.
> - Remove arm64_supports_nmi()
> - Remove fallback for when debug IPI isn't available.
> - Renamed "NMI IPI" to "debug IPI" since it might not be backed by NMI.
> - Update commit description
> - arch_trigger_cpumask_backtrace() no longer returns bool
>
> Changes in v8:
> - "Provide a stub kgdb_nmicallback() if !CONFIG_KGDB" new for v8
> - "Tag the arm64 idle functions as __cpuidle" new for v8
> - Removed "#ifdef CONFIG_SMP" since arm64 is always SMP
> - debug_ipi_setup() and debug_ipi_teardown() no longer take cpu param
>
> Douglas Anderson (2):
> arm64: idle: Tag the arm64 idle functions as __cpuidle
> kgdb: Provide a stub kgdb_nmicallback() if !CONFIG_KGDB
>
> Sumit Garg (5):
> irqchip/gic-v3: Enable support for SGIs to act as NMIs
> arm64: Add framework for a debug IPI
> arm64: smp: Assign and setup the debug IPI
> arm64: ipi_debug: Add support for backtrace using the debug IPI
> arm64: kgdb: Roundup cpus using the debug IPI
>
> arch/arm64/include/asm/irq.h | 3 +
> arch/arm64/kernel/Makefile | 2 +-
> arch/arm64/kernel/idle.c | 4 +-
> arch/arm64/kernel/ipi_debug.c | 102 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> arch/arm64/kernel/ipi_debug.h | 13 +++++
> arch/arm64/kernel/kgdb.c | 14 +++++
> arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c | 11 ++++
> drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c | 29 +++++++---
> include/linux/kgdb.h | 1 +
> 9 files changed, 168 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 arch/arm64/kernel/ipi_debug.c
> create mode 100644 arch/arm64/kernel/ipi_debug.h
>
> --
> 2.41.0.rc2.161.g9c6817b8e7-goog
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists