On 04/07/2017 09:09, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 05:30:28PM +0200, Marc Gonzalez wrote:
>
>> And at the end of smp8759_config_read:
>>
>> printk("in_atomic_preempt_off = %d\n", in_atomic_preempt_off());
>
> That's confused...
That much is certain. I am indeed grasping at straws.
I grepped "scheduling while atomic", found __schedule_bug()
in kernel/sched/core.c and saw
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT) && in_atomic_preempt_off()) {
pr_err("Preemption disabled at:");
print_ip_sym(preempt_disable_ip);
pr_cont("\n");
}
I thought printing the value of in_atomic_preempt_off()
in the callback would indicate whether preemption had
already been turned off at that point.
It doesn't work like that?
BTW, why didn't print_ip_sym(preempt_disable_ip); say
where preemption had been disabled?
>> [ 1.026568] BUG: scheduling while atomic: swapper/0/1/0x00000002
>> [ 1.032625] 5 locks held by swapper/0/1:
>> [ 1.036575] #0: (&dev->mutex){......}, at: [<c038c684>] __driver_attach+0x50/0xd0
>> [ 1.044319] #1: (&dev->mutex){......}, at: [<c038c694>] __driver_attach+0x60/0xd0
>> [ 1.052050] #2: (pci_lock){+.+...}, at: [<c03309d8>] pci_bus_read_config_dword+0x44/0x94
>
> This is a raw_spinlock_t, that disables preemption
drivers/pci/access.c
/*
* This interrupt-safe spinlock protects all accesses to PCI
* configuration space.
*/
DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(pci_lock);
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pci_lock, flags);
res = bus->ops->read(bus, devfn, pos, len, &data);
IIUC, it's not possible to call stop_machine() while holding
a raw spinlock? What about regular spinlocks? IIUC, in RT,
regular spinlocks may sleep?
I didn't find "preempt" or "schedul" in the spinlock doc.
https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/locking/spinlocks.txt
> Using stop_machine() is per definition doing it wrong ;-)
Here's the high-level view. My HW is borked and muxes
config space and mem space. So I need a way to freeze
the entire system, make the config space access, and
then return the system to normal. (AFAICT, config space
accesses are rare, so if I kill performance for these
accesses, the system might remain usable.)
Is there a way to do this? Mark suggested stop_machine
but it seems using it in my situation is not quite
straight-forward.
Regards.
