From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
Mikhail Gavrilov <mikhail.v.gavrilov@gmail.com>,
linuxarm@huawei.com
Cc: rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, guohanjun@huawei.com,
gshan@redhat.com, miguel.luis@oracle.com,
catalin.marinas@arm.com,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@lists.linux.dev>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"Bowman, Terry" <Terry.bowman@amd.com>
Subject: Re: 6.11/regression/bisected - The commit c1385c1f0ba3 caused a new possible recursive locking detected warning at computer boot.
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:48:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2dd6b8e1-6f06-4ab8-b610-c0bd95a397e8@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87le1ounl2.ffs@tglx>
Hi,
On 7/26/24 6:26 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 25 2024 at 18:13, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Jul 2024 18:20:06 +0100
>> Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> This is an interesting corner and perhaps reflects a flawed
>>>> assumption we were making that for this path anything that can happen for an
>>>> initially present CPU can also happen for a hotplugged one. On the hotplugged
>>>> path the lock was always held and hence the static_key_enable() would
>>>> have failed.
>
> No. The original code invoked this without cpus read locked via:
>
> acpi_processor_driver.probe()
> __acpi_processor_start()
> ....
>
> and the cpu hotplug callback finds it already set up, so it won't reach
> the static_key_enable() anymore.
>
>> One bit I need to check out tomorrow is to make sure this doesn't race with the
>> workfn that is used to tear down the same static key on error.
>
> There is a simpler solution for that. See the uncompiled below.
I was seeing the same lockdep issue as the original reporter on my
AMD Ryzen 9 5950X machine and I can confirm that the suggested patch
(below) fixes this:
Tested-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Regards,
Hans
> ---
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/aperfmperf.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/aperfmperf.c
> index b3fa61d45352..0b69bfbf345d 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/aperfmperf.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/aperfmperf.c
> @@ -306,7 +306,7 @@ static void freq_invariance_enable(void)
> WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
> return;
> }
> - static_branch_enable(&arch_scale_freq_key);
> + static_branch_enable_cpuslocked(&arch_scale_freq_key);
> register_freq_invariance_syscore_ops();
> pr_info("Estimated ratio of average max frequency by base frequency (times 1024): %llu\n", arch_max_freq_ratio);
> }
> @@ -323,8 +323,10 @@ static void __init bp_init_freq_invariance(void)
> if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_INTEL)
> return;
>
> - if (intel_set_max_freq_ratio())
> + if (intel_set_max_freq_ratio()) {
> + guard(cpus_read_lock)();
> freq_invariance_enable();
> + }
> }
>
> static void disable_freq_invariance_workfn(struct work_struct *work)
>
>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-03 15:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-22 19:36 Mikhail Gavrilov
2024-07-23 10:24 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-23 17:20 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-25 17:13 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-25 22:30 ` Mikhail Gavrilov
2024-07-26 15:07 ` Terry Bowman
2024-07-26 16:37 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-26 17:59 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-26 16:26 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-07-26 17:14 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-26 18:01 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-26 20:35 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-07-27 7:13 ` Mikhail Gavrilov
2024-08-03 15:48 ` Hans de Goede [this message]
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=2dd6b8e1-6f06-4ab8-b610-c0bd95a397e8@redhat.com \
--to=hdegoede@redhat.com \
--cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=Terry.bowman@amd.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gshan@redhat.com \
--cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
--cc=miguel.luis@oracle.com \
--cc=mikhail.v.gavrilov@gmail.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=regressions@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®