linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] rcu: handle quiescent states for PREEMPT_RCU=n, PREEMPT

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Z0hx34Cjw1X0r1lo@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2024 14:36:31 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To: Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	paulmck@...nel.org, mingo@...nel.org, bigeasy@...utronix.de,
	juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
	dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
	mgorman@...e.de, vschneid@...hat.com, efault@....de,
	sshegde@...ux.ibm.com, boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] rcu: handle quiescent states for PREEMPT_RCU=n,
 PREEMPT_COUNT=y

Le Wed, Nov 06, 2024 at 12:17:56PM -0800, Ankur Arora a écrit :
> With PREEMPT_RCU=n, cond_resched() provides urgently needed quiescent
> states for read-side critical sections via rcu_all_qs().
> One reason why this was needed, was lacking preempt-count, the tick
> handler has no way of knowing whether it is executing in a read-side
> critical section or not.
> 
> With PREEMPT_LAZY=y, there can be configurations with PREEMPT_COUNT=y,
> PREEMPT_RCU=n, where cond_resched() is a stub that does not provide
> quiescent states via rcu_all_qs().
> 
> So, use the availability of preempt_count() to report quiescent states
> in rcu_flavor_sched_clock_irq().
> 
> Suggested-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>
> ---
>  kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h | 11 +++++++----
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
> index 1c7cbd145d5e..da324d66034b 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
> @@ -974,13 +974,16 @@ static void rcu_preempt_check_blocked_tasks(struct rcu_node *rnp)
>   */
>  static void rcu_flavor_sched_clock_irq(int user)
>  {
> -	if (user || rcu_is_cpu_rrupt_from_idle()) {
> +	if (user || rcu_is_cpu_rrupt_from_idle() ||
> +	     (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT) &&
> +	      !(preempt_count() & (PREEMPT_MASK | SOFTIRQ_MASK)))) {

I'm never sure if nested hardirqs are still possible but just in case,

    preempt_count() == HARDIRQ_OFFSET

might be a more robust check. And that also applies to the PREEMPT_RCU
implementation.

Thanks.

>  
>  		/*
>  		 * Get here if this CPU took its interrupt from user
> -		 * mode or from the idle loop, and if this is not a
> -		 * nested interrupt.  In this case, the CPU is in
> -		 * a quiescent state, so note it.
> +		 * mode, from the idle loop without this being a nested
> +		 * interrupt, or while not holding a preempt count (but
> +		 * with PREEMPT_COUNT=y. In this case, the CPU is in a
> +		 * quiescent state, so note it.
>  		 *
>  		 * No memory barrier is required here because rcu_qs()
>  		 * references only CPU-local variables that other CPUs
> -- 
> 2.43.5
>