From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cgroup: use irqsave in cgroup_rstat_flush_locked()
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2018 13:24:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180703202424.GB72677@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180703164544.25268-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de>
(cc'ing Peter and Ingo for lockdep)
Hello, Sebastian.
On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 06:45:44PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> All callers of cgroup_rstat_flush_locked() acquire cgroup_rstat_lock
> either with spin_lock_irq() or spin_lock_irqsave().
So, irq is always disabled in cgroup_rstat_flush_locked().
> cgroup_rstat_flush_locked() itself acquires cgroup_rstat_cpu_lock which
> is a raw_spin_lock. This lock is also acquired in cgroup_rstat_updated()
> in IRQ context and therefore requires _irqsave() locking suffix in
> cgroup_rstat_flush_locked().
Yes, the cpu locks should be irqsafe too; however, as irq is always
disabled in that function, save/restore is redundant, no?
> Since there is no difference between spin_lock_t and raw_spin_lock_t
> on !RT lockdep does not complain here. On RT lockdep complains because
> the interrupts were not disabled here and a deadlock is possible.
We at least used to do this in the kernel - manipulating irqsafe locks
with spin_lock/unlock() if the irq state is known, whether enabled or
disabled, and ISTR lockdep being smart enough to track actual irq
state to determine irq safety. Am I misremembering or is this
different on RT kernels?
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-03 20:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-07-03 16:45 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-07-03 20:24 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2018-07-03 21:35 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-07-11 11:05 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-07-11 17:28 ` Tejun Heo
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=20180703202424.GB72677@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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
Powered by JetHome