The patch titled
Subject: smp: Give WARN()ing when calling smp_call_function_many()/single() in serving irq
has been added to the -mm tree. Its filename is
smp-give-warning-when-calling-smp_call_function_many-single-in-serving-irq.patch
Before you just go and hit "reply", please:
a) Consider who else should be cc'ed
b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well
c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a
reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
The -mm tree is included into linux-next and is updated
there every 3-4 working days
------------------------------------------------------
From: Chuansheng Liu <chuansheng.liu@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: smp: Give WARN()ing when calling smp_call_function_many()/single() in serving irq
Currently the functions smp_call_function_many()/single() will give a
WARN()ing only in the case of irqs_disabled(), but that check is not
enough to guarantee execution of the SMP cross-calls.
In many other cases such as softirq handling/interrupt handling, the two
APIs still can not be called, just as the smp_call_function_many()
comments say:
* You must not call this function with disabled interrupts or from a
* hardware interrupt handler or from a bottom half handler. Preemption
* must be disabled when calling this function.
There is a real case for softirq DEADLOCK case:
CPUA CPUB
spin_lock(&spinlock)
Any irq coming, call the irq handler
irq_exit()
spin_lock_irq(&spinlock)
<== Blocking here due to
CPUB hold it
__do_softirq()
run_timer_softirq()
timer_cb()
call smp_call_function_many()
send IPI interrupt to CPUA
wait_csd()
Then both CPUA and CPUB will be deadlocked here.
So we should give a warning in the nmi, hardirq or softirq context as well.
Moreover, adding one new macro in_serving_irq() which indicates we are
processing nmi, hardirq or sofirq.
Signed-off-by: liu chuansheng <chuansheng.liu@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx>
Tested-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
include/linux/hardirq.h | 5 +++++
kernel/smp.c | 11 +++++++----
2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff -puN include/linux/hardirq.h~smp-give-warning-when-calling-smp_call_function_many-single-in-serving-irq include/linux/hardirq.h
--- a/include/linux/hardirq.h~smp-give-warning-when-calling-smp_call_function_many-single-in-serving-irq
+++ a/include/linux/hardirq.h
@@ -94,6 +94,11 @@
*/
#define in_nmi() (preempt_count() & NMI_MASK)
+/*
+ * Are we in nmi,irq context, or softirq context?
+ */
+#define in_serving_irq() (in_nmi() || in_irq() || in_serving_softirq())
+
#if defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT)
# define PREEMPT_CHECK_OFFSET 1
#else
diff -puN kernel/smp.c~smp-give-warning-when-calling-smp_call_function_many-single-in-serving-irq kernel/smp.c
--- a/kernel/smp.c~smp-give-warning-when-calling-smp_call_function_many-single-in-serving-irq
+++ a/kernel/smp.c
@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
#include <linux/gfp.h>
#include <linux/smp.h>
#include <linux/cpu.h>
+#include <linux/hardirq.h>
#include "smpboot.h"
@@ -240,8 +241,9 @@ int smp_call_function_single(int cpu, sm
* send smp call function interrupt to this cpu and as such deadlocks
* can't happen.
*/
- WARN_ON_ONCE(cpu_online(this_cpu) && irqs_disabled()
- && !oops_in_progress);
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(cpu_online(this_cpu)
+ && (irqs_disabled() || in_serving_irq())
+ && !oops_in_progress);
if (cpu == this_cpu) {
local_irq_save(flags);
@@ -378,8 +380,9 @@ void smp_call_function_many(const struct
* send smp call function interrupt to this cpu and as such deadlocks
* can't happen.
*/
- WARN_ON_ONCE(cpu_online(this_cpu) && irqs_disabled()
- && !oops_in_progress && !early_boot_irqs_disabled);
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(cpu_online(this_cpu)
+ && (irqs_disabled() || in_serving_irq())
+ && !oops_in_progress && !early_boot_irqs_disabled);
/* Try to fastpath. So, what's a CPU they want? Ignoring this one. */
cpu = cpumask_first_and(mask, cpu_online_mask);
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from chuansheng.liu@xxxxxxxxx are
linux-next.patch
smp-give-warning-when-calling-smp_call_function_many-single-in-serving-irq.patch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe mm-commits" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
