[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZRWTktRdej5OW53q@Boquns-Mac-mini.home>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2023 07:54:10 -0700
From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@...cinc.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] srcu: Use try-lock lockdep annotation for NMI-safe
access.
On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 10:09:00AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 11:06:09PM -0700, Boqun Feng wrote:
>
> > I think this is a "side-effect" of commit f0f44752f5f6 ("rcu: Annotate
> > SRCU's update-side lockdep dependencies"). In verify_lock_unused(), i.e.
> > the checking for NMI lock usages, the logic is that
>
> I think I'm having a problem with this commit -- that is, by adding
> lockdep you're adding tracepoint, which rely on RCU being active.
>
> The result is that SRCU is now no longer usable from !RCU regions.
>
Interesting
> Was this considered and intended?
>
No, I don't think I have considered this before, I think I may still
miss something here, maybe you or Paul can provide an example for such
a case?
One thing though, before the commit, srcu_read_lock() already has an
rcu_lock_acquire() annotation which eventually calls lock_acquire()
which has a tracepoint in it.
Regards,
Boqun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists