| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2023 06:59:46 +0530
From: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
patches@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux@...ck-us.net, shuah@...nel.org, patches@...nelci.org,
lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, pavel@...x.de, jonathanh@...dia.com,
f.fainelli@...il.com, sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com,
srw@...dewatkins.net, rwarsow@....de,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 00/29] 4.19.282-rc1 review
Hi Steven and Greg,
On Thu, 27 Apr 2023 at 15:19, Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Steven,
>
> On Wed, 26 Apr 2023 at 23:14, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 26 Apr 2023 17:09:45 -0400
> > Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Now the question is, why is this triggering on 4.19 but not in latest
> > > mainline?
> >
> > I found it, I backported this patch and the warning goes away (at least for
> > me). Can you add this and see if it makes the warning go away for you too?
>
> I have applied this patch on stable-rc 4.19 branch and tested on
> - arm64: Juno-r2
> - x86_64 device
>
> and the reported problem has been resolved.
>
> Thanks for finding a quick fix patch.
>
> >
> > -- Steve
> >
> > From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> > Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2020 20:50:19 +0200
> > Subject: [PATCH] sched,idle,rcu: Push rcu_idle deeper into the idle path
> >
> > commit 1098582a0f6c4e8fd28da0a6305f9233d02c9c1d upstream.
Can we expect this patch to be merged into 4.19 ?
The reason for the question is, the reported problem is still seen on
stable-rc 4.19.
> >
> > Lots of things take locks, due to a wee bug, rcu_lockdep didn't notice
> > that the locking tracepoints were using RCU.
> >
> > Push rcu_idle_{enter,exit}() as deep as possible into the idle paths,
> > this also resolves a lot of _rcuidle()/RCU_NONIDLE() usage.
> >
> > Specifically, sched_clock_idle_wakeup_event() will use ktime which
> > will use seqlocks which will tickle lockdep, and
> > stop_critical_timings() uses lock.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
> > Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> > Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> > Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> > Tested-by: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
> > Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200821085348.310943801@infradead.org
>
>
> Tested-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@...aro.org>
> Tested-by: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>
>
> test log:
> - https://lkft.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/6380295#L1418
> - https://lkft.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/6380303#L1443
>
> > ---
> > drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c | 12 ++++++++----
> > kernel/sched/idle.c | 22 ++++++++--------------
> > 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> > index 2d182dc1b49e..01bde6dec13a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> > @@ -140,13 +140,14 @@ static void enter_s2idle_proper(struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
> > * executing it contains RCU usage regarded as invalid in the idle
> > * context, so tell RCU about that.
> > */
> > - RCU_NONIDLE(tick_freeze());
> > + tick_freeze();
> > /*
> > * The state used here cannot be a "coupled" one, because the "coupled"
> > * cpuidle mechanism enables interrupts and doing that with timekeeping
> > * suspended is generally unsafe.
> > */
> > stop_critical_timings();
> > + rcu_idle_enter();
> > drv->states[index].enter_s2idle(dev, drv, index);
> > if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!irqs_disabled()))
> > local_irq_disable();
> > @@ -155,7 +156,8 @@ static void enter_s2idle_proper(struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
> > * first CPU executing it calls functions containing RCU read-side
> > * critical sections, so tell RCU about that.
> > */
> > - RCU_NONIDLE(tick_unfreeze());
> > + rcu_idle_exit();
> > + tick_unfreeze();
> > start_critical_timings();
> >
> > time_end = ns_to_ktime(local_clock());
> > @@ -224,16 +226,18 @@ int cpuidle_enter_state(struct cpuidle_device *dev, struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
> > /* Take note of the planned idle state. */
> > sched_idle_set_state(target_state);
> >
> > - trace_cpu_idle_rcuidle(index, dev->cpu);
> > + trace_cpu_idle(index, dev->cpu);
> > time_start = ns_to_ktime(local_clock());
> >
> > stop_critical_timings();
> > + rcu_idle_enter();
> > entered_state = target_state->enter(dev, drv, index);
> > + rcu_idle_exit();
> > start_critical_timings();
> >
> > sched_clock_idle_wakeup_event();
> > time_end = ns_to_ktime(local_clock());
> > - trace_cpu_idle_rcuidle(PWR_EVENT_EXIT, dev->cpu);
> > + trace_cpu_idle(PWR_EVENT_EXIT, dev->cpu);
> >
> > /* The cpu is no longer idle or about to enter idle. */
> > sched_idle_set_state(NULL);
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/idle.c b/kernel/sched/idle.c
> > index 44a17366c8ec..4e3d149d64ad 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/idle.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/idle.c
> > @@ -53,17 +53,18 @@ __setup("hlt", cpu_idle_nopoll_setup);
> >
> > static noinline int __cpuidle cpu_idle_poll(void)
> > {
> > + trace_cpu_idle(0, smp_processor_id());
> > + stop_critical_timings();
> > rcu_idle_enter();
> > - trace_cpu_idle_rcuidle(0, smp_processor_id());
> > local_irq_enable();
> > - stop_critical_timings();
> >
> > while (!tif_need_resched() &&
> > - (cpu_idle_force_poll || tick_check_broadcast_expired()))
> > + (cpu_idle_force_poll || tick_check_broadcast_expired()))
> > cpu_relax();
> > - start_critical_timings();
> > - trace_cpu_idle_rcuidle(PWR_EVENT_EXIT, smp_processor_id());
> > +
> > rcu_idle_exit();
> > + start_critical_timings();
> > + trace_cpu_idle(PWR_EVENT_EXIT, smp_processor_id());
> >
> > return 1;
> > }
> > @@ -90,7 +91,9 @@ void __cpuidle default_idle_call(void)
> > local_irq_enable();
> > } else {
> > stop_critical_timings();
> > + rcu_idle_enter();
> > arch_cpu_idle();
> > + rcu_idle_exit();
> > start_critical_timings();
> > }
> > }
> > @@ -148,7 +151,6 @@ static void cpuidle_idle_call(void)
> >
> > if (cpuidle_not_available(drv, dev)) {
> > tick_nohz_idle_stop_tick();
> > - rcu_idle_enter();
> >
> > default_idle_call();
> > goto exit_idle;
> > @@ -166,19 +168,15 @@ static void cpuidle_idle_call(void)
> >
> > if (idle_should_enter_s2idle() || dev->use_deepest_state) {
> > if (idle_should_enter_s2idle()) {
> > - rcu_idle_enter();
> >
> > entered_state = cpuidle_enter_s2idle(drv, dev);
> > if (entered_state > 0) {
> > local_irq_enable();
> > goto exit_idle;
> > }
> > -
> > - rcu_idle_exit();
> > }
> >
> > tick_nohz_idle_stop_tick();
> > - rcu_idle_enter();
> >
> > next_state = cpuidle_find_deepest_state(drv, dev);
> > call_cpuidle(drv, dev, next_state);
> > @@ -195,8 +193,6 @@ static void cpuidle_idle_call(void)
> > else
> > tick_nohz_idle_retain_tick();
> >
> > - rcu_idle_enter();
> > -
> > entered_state = call_cpuidle(drv, dev, next_state);
> > /*
> > * Give the governor an opportunity to reflect on the outcome
> > @@ -212,8 +208,6 @@ static void cpuidle_idle_call(void)
> > */
> > if (WARN_ON_ONCE(irqs_disabled()))
> > local_irq_enable();
> > -
> > - rcu_idle_exit();
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > --
> > 2.39.2
>
> - Naresh
>
>
> --
> Linaro LKFT
> https://lkft.linaro.org
Powered by blists - more mailing lists