From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752251AbbJQJ5C (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sat, 17 Oct 2015 05:57:02 -0400
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:55467 "EHLO
	bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752076AbbJQJ5A (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sat, 17 Oct 2015 05:57:00 -0400
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 11:56:51 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, ak@linux.intel.com,
        edumazet@google.com, acme@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/core: fix RCU issues with cgroup monitoring mode
Message-ID: <20151017095651.GE3816@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20151017012811.GA18581@thinkpad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20151017012811.GA18581@thinkpad>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 03:28:11AM +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> 
> This patch eliminates all known RCU violations detected
> by the RCU  checker (PROVE_RCU). The impact code paths
> were all related to cgroup mode monitoring and involved
> access a task's cgrp.

But were they right? This patch provides no clues.

> Signed-off-by: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
> ---

> @@ -2094,6 +2104,7 @@ static int  __perf_install_in_context(void *info)
>  		cpuctx->task_ctx = task_ctx;
>  		task = task_ctx->task;
>  	}
> +	rcu_read_lock();
>  
>  	cpu_ctx_sched_out(cpuctx, EVENT_ALL);
>  
> @@ -2112,6 +2123,8 @@ static int  __perf_install_in_context(void *info)
>  	 */
>  	perf_event_sched_in(cpuctx, task_ctx, task);
>  
> +	rcu_read_unlock();
> +
>  	perf_pmu_enable(cpuctx->ctx.pmu);
>  	perf_ctx_unlock(cpuctx, task_ctx);
>  
> @@ -2398,7 +2411,9 @@ static void ctx_sched_out(struct perf_event_context *ctx,
>  		return;
>  
>  	update_context_time(ctx);
> +	rcu_read_lock();
>  	update_cgrp_time_from_cpuctx(cpuctx);
> +	rcu_read_unlock();
>  	if (!ctx->nr_active)
>  		return;
>  

And these impact !cgroup code, and the last looks like it should be
inside update_cgrp_time_from_cpuctx() if at all.