mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Julia Cartwright <juliac@eso.teric.us>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
	mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	tglx@linutronix.de, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] kernel/sofirq: consolidate common code in __tasklet_schedule() + _hi_
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 16:31:23 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180215223123.GB1924@kryptos.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180215150707.49cc2332@gandalf.local.home>

On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 03:07:07PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2018 18:20:41 +0100
> Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> wrote:
> 
> > -void __tasklet_schedule(struct tasklet_struct *t)
> > +static void __tasklet_schedule_common(struct tasklet_struct *t,
> > +				      struct tasklet_head *head,
> > +				      unsigned int softirq_nr)
> >  {
> >  	unsigned long flags;
> >  
> >  	local_irq_save(flags);
> 
> If you look at the original patch, it did not move local_irq_save()
> into the common function.
> 
> >  	t->next = NULL;
> > -	*__this_cpu_read(tasklet_vec.tail) = t;
> > -	__this_cpu_write(tasklet_vec.tail, &(t->next));
> > -	raise_softirq_irqoff(TASKLET_SOFTIRQ);
> > +	*head->tail = t;
> > +	head->tail = &(t->next);
> > +	raise_softirq_irqoff(softirq_nr);
> >  	local_irq_restore(flags);
> >  }
> > +
> > +void __tasklet_schedule(struct tasklet_struct *t)
> > +{
> > +	__tasklet_schedule_common(t, this_cpu_ptr(&tasklet_vec),
> 
> What can happen is, we reference (tasklet_vec) on one CPU, get
> preempted (running in ksoftirqd), scheduled on another CPU, then when
> inside the common code, we are executing on a different CPU than the
> tasklet is for. The rasise_softirq() is happening on the wrong CPU.
> 
> The local_irq_save() can't be moved to the common function. It must be
> done by each individual function.

Well, it can be, but the percpu access needs to go with it; so an
alternative solution would be the below.

I'm also wondering whether the t->next = NULL assignment could be lifted
out from irqs-disabled region.

   Julia

diff --git a/kernel/softirq.c b/kernel/softirq.c
index fa7ed89a9fcf..177de3640c78 100644
--- a/kernel/softirq.c
+++ b/kernel/softirq.c
@@ -461,12 +461,14 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct tasklet_head, tasklet_vec);
 static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct tasklet_head, tasklet_hi_vec);
 
 static void __tasklet_schedule_common(struct tasklet_struct *t,
-				      struct tasklet_head *head,
+				      struct tasklet_head __percpu *headp,
 				      unsigned int softirq_nr)
 {
+	struct tasklet_head *head;
 	unsigned long flags;
 
 	local_irq_save(flags);
+	head = this_cpu_ptr(headp);
 	t->next = NULL;
 	*head->tail = t;
 	head->tail = &(t->next);
@@ -476,14 +478,14 @@ static void __tasklet_schedule_common(struct tasklet_struct *t,
 
 void __tasklet_schedule(struct tasklet_struct *t)
 {
-	__tasklet_schedule_common(t, this_cpu_ptr(&tasklet_vec),
+	__tasklet_schedule_common(t, &tasklet_vec,
 				  TASKLET_SOFTIRQ);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(__tasklet_schedule);
 
 void __tasklet_hi_schedule(struct tasklet_struct *t)
 {
-	__tasklet_schedule_common(t, this_cpu_ptr(&tasklet_hi_vec),
+	__tasklet_schedule_common(t, &tasklet_hi_vec,
 				  HI_SOFTIRQ);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(__tasklet_hi_schedule);

  reply	other threads:[~2018-02-15 22:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-02-15 17:20 Consolidate tasklet + tasklet-hi code Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-02-15 17:20 ` [PATCH 1/2] kernel/sofirq: consolidate common code in __tasklet_schedule() + _hi_ Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-02-15 20:07   ` Steven Rostedt
2018-02-15 22:31     ` Julia Cartwright [this message]
2018-02-16  8:53     ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-02-16 17:31       ` Steven Rostedt
2018-02-16 17:55         ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-02-16 18:02           ` Steven Rostedt
2018-02-16 17:08     ` [PATCH 1/2 v2] " Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-02-20 17:48   ` [kernel/sofirq] ffce8e6f93: BUG:using_smp_processor_id()in_preemptible kernel test robot
2018-02-21 10:50     ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-02-15 17:20 ` [PATCH 2/2] kernel/sofirq: consolidate common code in tasklet_action() + tasklet_hi_action() Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-02-15 20:08   ` Steven Rostedt
2018-02-27 16:48 [PATCH v3 00/02] Consolidate tasklet + tasklet-hi code Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-02-27 16:48 ` [PATCH 1/2] kernel/sofirq: consolidate common code in __tasklet_schedule() + _hi_ Sebastian Andrzej Siewior

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=20180215223123.GB1924@kryptos.localdomain \
    --to=juliac@eso.teric.us \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®