On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 08:56:14PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/hw_irq.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/hw_irq.h > index 3a0db7b0b46e..35060be09073 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/hw_irq.h > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/hw_irq.h > @@ -200,17 +200,14 @@ static inline bool arch_irqs_disabled(void) > #define powerpc_local_irq_pmu_save(flags) \ > do { \ > raw_local_irq_pmu_save(flags); \ > - trace_hardirqs_off(); \ > + if (!raw_irqs_disabled_flags(flags)) \ > + trace_hardirqs_off(); \ > } while(0) So one problem with the above is something like this: raw_local_irq_save(); <NMI> powerpc_local_irq_pmu_save(); that would now no longer call into tracing/lockdep at all. As a consequence, lockdep and tracing would show the NMI ran with IRQs enabled, which is exceptionally weird.. Similar problem with: raw_local_irq_disable(); local_irq_save() Now, most architectures today seem to do what x86 also did: <NMI> trace_hardirqs_off() ... if (irqs_unmasked(regs)) trace_hardirqs_on() </NMI> Which is 'funny' when it interleaves like: local_irq_disable(); ... local_irq_enable() trace_hardirqs_on(); <NMI/> raw_local_irq_enable(); Because then it will undo the trace_hardirqs_on() we just did. With the result that both tracing and lockdep will see a hardirqs-disable without a matching enable, while the hardware state is enabled. Which is exactly the state Alexey seems to have ran into. Now, x86, and at least arm64 call nmi_enter() before trace_hardirqs_off(), but AFAICT Power never did that, and that's part of the problem. nmi_enter() does lockdep_off() and that _used_ to also kill IRQ tracking. Now, my patch changed that, it makes IRQ tracking not respect lockdep_off(). And that exposed x86 (and everybody else :/) to the same problem you have. And this is why I made x86 look at software state in NMIs. Because then it all works out. For bonus points, trace_hardirqs_*() also has some do-it-once logic for tracing. Anyway, it's Saturday evening, time for a beer. I'll stare at this more later.