On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 10:23:26AM +0100, Yun Levi wrote:
> Hi, Paul.
>
> Thanks for looking into this :)
>
>
> > Except that rcu_report_qs_rdp() is invoked with interrupts enabled,
> > which means that there is some possibility of state changes up to the
> > raw_spin_lock_irqsave_rcu_node(rnp, flags) statement.
> >
> > So, did you check whether RCU's interrupt paths change this state?
>
> In my narrow view,
> only a new gp started, cpu_no_qs.b.norm changes as true in the path of
> rcu_sched_clock_irq.
> But in that case, rcu_report_qs_rdp isn't called.
>
> Did I understand your question well and are there any missed paths I didn't see?
Suppose that the scheduler-clock interrupt invoking rcu_sched_clock_irq()
happened just before the lock was acquired in rcu_report_qs_rdp().
Suppose further that the RCU grace-period kthread started a new grace
period just before that interrupt occurred. Then mightn't that interrupt
notice the new grace period and set ->cpu_no_qs.b.norm to true before
fully returning?
Thanx, Paul
> > Why not start with something like this?
> >
> > if (!WARN_ON_ONCE(!rdp->cpu_no_qs.b.norm) ||
> > rdp->gp_seq != rnp->gp_seq || rdp->gpwrap) {
> >
>
> Yes. but with different message
