Re: [PATCH 14/36] cpuidle: Fix rcu_idle_*() usage
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/36] cpuidle: Fix rcu_idle_*() usage
- From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2022 17:59:46 +0100
- Cc: rth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ink@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mattst88@xxxxxxxxx, vgupta@xxxxxxxxxx, linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ulli.kroll@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx, shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx, Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, festevam@xxxxxxxxx, linux-imx@xxxxxxx, tony@xxxxxxxxxxx, khilman@xxxxxxxxxx, catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx, will@xxxxxxxxxx, guoren@xxxxxxxxxx, bcain@xxxxxxxxxxx, chenhuacai@xxxxxxxxxx, kernel@xxxxxxxxxx, geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, sammy@xxxxxxxxx, monstr@xxxxxxxxx, tsbogend@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dinguyen@xxxxxxxxxx, jonas@xxxxxxxxxxxx, stefan.kristiansson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, shorne@xxxxxxxxx, James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, deller@xxxxxx, mpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, benh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, paulus@xxxxxxxxx, paul.walmsley@xxxxxxxxxx, palmer@xxxxxxxxxxx, aou@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hca@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, gor@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, agordeev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, svens@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, ysato@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, dalias@xxxxxxxx, davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, richard@xxxxxx, anton.ivanov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, mingo@xxxxxxxxxx, bp@xxxxxxxxx, dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, x86@xxxxxxxxxx, hpa@xxxxxxxxx, acme@xxxxxxxxxx, alexander.shishkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx, namhyung@xxxxxxxxxx, jgross@xxxxxxxx, srivatsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, amakhalov@xxxxxxxxxx, pv-drivers@xxxxxxxxxx, boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx, chris@xxxxxxxxxx, jcmvbkbc@xxxxxxxxx, rafael@xxxxxxxxxx, lenb@xxxxxxxxxx, pavel@xxxxxx, gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mturquette@xxxxxxxxxxxx, sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx, daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx, lpieralisi@xxxxxxxxxx, sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx, agross@xxxxxxxxxx, bjorn.andersson@xxxxxxxxxx, anup@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx, jonathanh@xxxxxxxxxx, jacob.jun.pan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>, yury.norov@xxxxxxxxx, andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx, pmladek@xxxxxxxx, senozhatsky@xxxxxxxxxxxx, john.ogness@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx, frederic@xxxxxxxxxx, quic_neeraju@xxxxxxxxxxx, josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx, jiangshanlai@xxxxxxxxx, joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, juri.lelli@xxxxxxxxxx, vincent.guittot@xxxxxxxxxx, dietmar.eggemann@xxxxxxx, bsegall@xxxxxxxxxx, mgorman@xxxxxxx, bristot@xxxxxxxxxx, vschneid@xxxxxxxxxx, jpoimboe@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-alpha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-snps-arc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-csky@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-hexagon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ia64@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-m68k@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-mips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, openrisc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-parisc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-riscv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-s390@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-sh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, sparclinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-um@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-perf-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-xtensa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-clk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-arm-msm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-tegra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-arch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, rcu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <Yqi6Fd38ZCsDUnQG@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
- References: <20220608142723.103523089@infradead.org> <20220608144516.808451191@infradead.org> <YqiB6YpVqq4wuDtO@FVFF77S0Q05N> <Yqi6Fd38ZCsDUnQG@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 06:40:53PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 01:41:13PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 04:27:37PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > --- a/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c
> > > @@ -622,9 +622,13 @@ struct cpumask *tick_get_broadcast_onesh
> > > * to avoid a deep idle transition as we are about to get the
> > > * broadcast IPI right away.
> > > */
> > > -int tick_check_broadcast_expired(void)
> > > +noinstr int tick_check_broadcast_expired(void)
> > > {
> > > +#ifdef _ASM_GENERIC_BITOPS_INSTRUMENTED_NON_ATOMIC_H
> > > + return arch_test_bit(smp_processor_id(), cpumask_bits(tick_broadcast_force_mask));
> > > +#else
> > > return cpumask_test_cpu(smp_processor_id(), tick_broadcast_force_mask);
> > > +#endif
> > > }
> >
> > This is somewhat not-ideal. :/
>
> I'll say.
>
> > Could we unconditionally do the arch_test_bit() variant, with a comment, or
> > does that not exist in some cases?
>
> Loads of build errors ensued, which is how I ended up with this mess ...
Yaey :(
I see the same is true for the thread flag manipulation too.
I'll take a look and see if we can layer things so that we can use the arch_*()
helpers and wrap those consistently so that we don't have to check the CPP
guard.
Ideally we'd have a a better language that allows us to make some
context-senstive decisions, then we could hide all this gunk in the lower
levels with somethin like:
if (!THIS_IS_A_NOINSTR_FUNCTION()) {
explicit_instrumentation(...);
}
... ho hum.
Mark.
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Kernel]
[Sparc Linux]
[DCCP]
[Linux ARM]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCSI]
[Linux x86_64]
[Linux for Ham Radio]