Le Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 10:48:33AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra a écrit : > On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 11:46:25PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > > diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h > > index 8885be2c143e..ad18962b921d 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/sched.h > > +++ b/include/linux/sched.h > > @@ -1945,7 +1945,7 @@ extern struct task_struct *idle_task(int cpu); > > */ > > static __always_inline bool is_idle_task(const struct task_struct *p) > > { > > - return !!(p->flags & PF_IDLE); > > + return !!(READ_ONCE(p->flags) & PF_IDLE); > > } > > > > extern struct task_struct *curr_task(int cpu); > > diff --git a/kernel/cpu.c b/kernel/cpu.c > > index 3b9d5c7eb4a2..3a1991010f4e 100644 > > --- a/kernel/cpu.c > > +++ b/kernel/cpu.c > > @@ -1394,7 +1394,9 @@ void cpuhp_report_idle_dead(void) > > { > > struct cpuhp_cpu_state *st = this_cpu_ptr(&cpuhp_state); > > > > + WRITE_ONCE(current->flags, current->flags & ~PF_IDLE); > > BUG_ON(st->state != CPUHP_AP_OFFLINE); > > + > > rcutree_report_cpu_dead(); > > st->state = CPUHP_AP_IDLE_DEAD; > > /* > > @@ -1642,6 +1644,8 @@ void cpuhp_online_idle(enum cpuhp_state state) > > { > > struct cpuhp_cpu_state *st = this_cpu_ptr(&cpuhp_state); > > > > + WRITE_ONCE(current->flags, current->flags | PF_IDLE); > > + > > /* Happens for the boot cpu */ > > if (state != CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_IDLE) > > return; > > Without changing *ALL* ->flags stores to WRITE_ONCE() I don't see the > point of this. Also, since we only care about a single bit, how does > store tearing affect things? > > Not to mention if we're really paranoid, what are the SMP ordering > considerations :-) > > [ also, PF_ is used for Protocol Family, Page Flag and Process Flag, > grepping is a pain in the arse :-( ] Indeed. Also cpuhp_online_idle() is called with preemption disabled and cpuhp_report_idle_dead() with interrupts disabled. As for idle injection in play_idle_precise(), the flag is set and cleared with preemption disabled. This means that all writes are in an RCU read side critical section that RCU-tasks pre-gp's synchronize_rcu() waits for. So I don't think we need those WRITE_ONCE/READ_ONCE. Paul are you ok with that? Thanks.