mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
	Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] perf powerpc: Don't call perf_event_disable from atomic context
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 14:26:39 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161024122639.GN3102@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161006123301.GA13093@krava>




On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 02:33:01PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
> index aec9a1b1d25b..4d3bcbbf626a 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
> @@ -275,7 +275,7 @@ int __kprobes hw_breakpoint_handler(struct die_args *args)
>  	if (!stepped) {
>  		WARN(1, "Unable to handle hardware breakpoint. Breakpoint at "
>  			"0x%lx will be disabled.", info->address);
> -		perf_event_disable(bp);
> +		perf_event_disable_inatomic(bp);
>  		goto out;
>  	}
>  	/*
> diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> index 5c5362584aba..c794fd84a595 100644
> --- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
> +++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> @@ -1248,6 +1248,7 @@ extern u64 perf_swevent_set_period(struct perf_event *event);
>  extern void perf_event_enable(struct perf_event *event);
>  extern void perf_event_disable(struct perf_event *event);
>  extern void perf_event_disable_local(struct perf_event *event);
> +extern void perf_event_disable_inatomic(struct perf_event *event);
>  extern void perf_event_task_tick(void);
>  #else /* !CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS: */
>  static inline void *
> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
> index 7c0d263f6bc5..3d650ccf4def 100644
> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
> @@ -1960,6 +1960,13 @@ void perf_event_disable(struct perf_event *event)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(perf_event_disable);
>  
> +void perf_event_disable_inatomic(struct perf_event *event)
> +{
> +	event->pending_kill    = POLL_HUP;
> +	event->pending_disable = 1;
> +	irq_work_queue(&event->pending);
> +}
> +
>  static void perf_set_shadow_time(struct perf_event *event,
>  				 struct perf_event_context *ctx,
>  				 u64 tstamp)
> @@ -7074,9 +7081,7 @@ static int __perf_event_overflow(struct perf_event *event,
>  	event->pending_kill = POLL_IN;
>  	if (events && atomic_dec_and_test(&event->event_limit)) {
>  		ret = 1;
> -		event->pending_kill = POLL_HUP;
> -		event->pending_disable = 1;
> -		irq_work_queue(&event->pending);
> +		perf_event_disable_inatomic(event);
>  	}
>  
>  	event->overflow_handler(event, data, regs);


I'm a wee bit confused on the event->pending_kill assignment in that
helper. AFAICT that's not actually used in the PPC case, and if for some
reason, pending_wakeup gets set, do we want to deliver a HUP? The old
code didn't do that.

  reply	other threads:[~2016-10-24 12:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-09-21 13:55 [PATCH] " Jiri Olsa
2016-09-23 16:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-10-03 13:29   ` Jiri Olsa
2016-10-03 13:47     ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-10-04  4:29       ` Michael Ellerman
2016-10-04  7:06         ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-10-10 13:19           ` Will Deacon
2016-10-05  8:09         ` Jiri Olsa
2016-10-05 19:53           ` Jiri Olsa
2016-10-06  7:24             ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-10-06 12:33               ` [PATCHv2] " Jiri Olsa
2016-10-24 12:26                 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2016-10-24 15:49                   ` Jiri Olsa
2016-10-25  6:40                 ` [lkp] [perf powerpc] 18d1796d0b: [No primary change] kernel test robot
2016-10-25  9:06                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-10-26  2:09                     ` [LKP] " Huang, Ying
2016-10-26  9:48                       ` [PATCHv3] perf powerpc: Don't call perf_event_disable from atomic context Jiri Olsa
2016-10-26 15:12                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-10-26 15:24                           ` Jiri Olsa
2016-10-28 10:10                         ` [tip:perf/urgent] perf/powerpc: Don't call perf_event_disable() " tip-bot for Jiri Olsa
2016-10-04  4:08 ` [PATCH] perf powerpc: Don't call perf_event_disable " Michael Ellerman
2016-10-05  8:08   ` Jiri Olsa
2016-10-05  8:21   ` Jan Stancek

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20161024122639.GN3102@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
    --cc=jstancek@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mikey@neuling.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome