From nobody Tue May 7 01:31:31 2024 Delivered-To: importer@patchew.org Received-SPF: none (zohomail.com: 192.237.175.120 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of lists.xenproject.org) client-ip=192.237.175.120; envelope-from=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org; helo=lists.xenproject.org; Authentication-Results: mx.zohomail.com; spf=none (zohomail.com: 192.237.175.120 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of lists.xenproject.org) smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1584001765; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=mCO2eBOlYrU2Bfr0Lb5goyaFWGK4nW8Y1MYHParW5c4K+LNY75QMZ1yctqUbqococDWf6wAPypq0Fc8ummLxwM8f8vAMKop6t720zuUpXdG4KMC27IXIGNjwMSf6R/58WVOEag2sgiDEdyWt5mm5/Ds+AXQ0kYMRqJuxCK6PAQA= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1584001765; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Sender:Subject:To; bh=MpgyHekZhI8wnByEjnFy+gizCtGOPbvGQPzdayBLE+U=; b=XQv8/3okoM20fyOrgMl1bKHuurhnl+dPbSS9uMO5L7Sdlezuvk8s5KS/AivkA9M0Kv4kLQi6+Egezwx5wDLba6iNTewyOukbcFe14GbyZrQtSrFIuAeBlOCqUCycmrQUonOsQgTrRvI/L+41tSxaEc2Gnw2tl3jrX2pkYzc0IUI= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; spf=none (zohomail.com: 192.237.175.120 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of lists.xenproject.org) smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Return-Path: Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1584001765993484.4715756423642; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 01:29:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jCJCu-0004uC-4T; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:28:44 +0000 Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jCJCs-0004tv-BR for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:28:42 +0000 Received: from mx2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.15]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 7758d8a8-643b-11ea-bec1-bc764e2007e4; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:28:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DFF5B1A1; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:28:34 +0000 (UTC) X-Inumbo-ID: 7758d8a8-643b-11ea-bec1-bc764e2007e4 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de From: Juergen Gross To: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 09:28:28 +0100 Message-Id: <20200312082831.22280-2-jgross@suse.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.16.4 In-Reply-To: <20200312082831.22280-1-jgross@suse.com> References: <20200312082831.22280-1-jgross@suse.com> Subject: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 1/4] xen/rcu: don't use stop_machine_run() for rcu_barrier() X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Juergen Gross , Stefano Stabellini , Julien Grall , Wei Liu , Andrew Cooper , Ian Jackson , George Dunlap , Jan Beulich MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" Today rcu_barrier() is calling stop_machine_run() to synchronize all physical cpus in order to ensure all pending rcu calls have finished when returning. As stop_machine_run() is using tasklets this requires scheduling of idle vcpus on all cpus imposing the need to call rcu_barrier() on idle cpus only in case of core scheduling being active, as otherwise a scheduling deadlock would occur. There is no need at all to do the syncing of the cpus in tasklets, as rcu activity is started in __do_softirq() called whenever softirq activity is allowed. So rcu_barrier() can easily be modified to use softirq for synchronization of the cpus no longer requiring any scheduling activity. As there already is a rcu softirq reuse that for the synchronization. Remove the barrier element from struct rcu_data as it isn't used. Finally switch rcu_barrier() to return void as it now can never fail. Partially-based-on-patch-by: Igor Druzhinin Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross --- V2: - add recursion detection V3: - fix races (Igor Druzhinin) V5: - rename done_count to pending_count (Jan Beulich) - fix race (Jan Beulich) --- xen/common/rcupdate.c | 92 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------= ---- xen/include/xen/rcupdate.h | 2 +- 2 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) diff --git a/xen/common/rcupdate.c b/xen/common/rcupdate.c index 03d84764d2..c5ef6acb1e 100644 --- a/xen/common/rcupdate.c +++ b/xen/common/rcupdate.c @@ -83,7 +83,6 @@ struct rcu_data { struct rcu_head **donetail; long blimit; /* Upper limit on a processed batch = */ int cpu; - struct rcu_head barrier; long last_rs_qlen; /* qlen during the last resched */ =20 /* 3) idle CPUs handling */ @@ -91,6 +90,7 @@ struct rcu_data { bool idle_timer_active; =20 bool process_callbacks; + bool barrier_active; }; =20 /* @@ -143,51 +143,82 @@ static int qhimark =3D 10000; static int qlowmark =3D 100; static int rsinterval =3D 1000; =20 -struct rcu_barrier_data { - struct rcu_head head; - atomic_t *cpu_count; -}; +/* + * rcu_barrier() handling: + * cpu_count holds the number of cpu required to finish barrier handling. + * pending_count is initialized to nr_cpus + 1. + * Cpus are synchronized via softirq mechanism. rcu_barrier() is regarded = to + * be active if pending_count is not zero. In case rcu_barrier() is called= on + * multiple cpus it is enough to check for pending_count being not zero on= entry + * and to call process_pending_softirqs() in a loop until pending_count dr= ops to + * zero, before starting the new rcu_barrier() processing. + * In order to avoid hangs when rcu_barrier() is called multiple times on = the + * same cpu in fast sequence and a slave cpu couldn't drop out of the + * barrier handling fast enough a second counter pending_count is needed. + * The rcu_barrier() invoking cpu will wait until pending_count reaches 1 + * (meaning that all cpus have finished processing the barrier) and then w= ill + * reset pending_count to 0 to enable entering rcu_barrier() again. + */ +static atomic_t cpu_count =3D ATOMIC_INIT(0); +static atomic_t pending_count =3D ATOMIC_INIT(0); =20 static void rcu_barrier_callback(struct rcu_head *head) { - struct rcu_barrier_data *data =3D container_of( - head, struct rcu_barrier_data, head); - atomic_inc(data->cpu_count); + atomic_dec(&cpu_count); } =20 -static int rcu_barrier_action(void *_cpu_count) +static void rcu_barrier_action(void) { - struct rcu_barrier_data data =3D { .cpu_count =3D _cpu_count }; - - ASSERT(!local_irq_is_enabled()); - local_irq_enable(); + struct rcu_head head; =20 /* * When callback is executed, all previously-queued RCU work on this C= PU - * is completed. When all CPUs have executed their callback, data.cpu_= count - * will have been incremented to include every online CPU. + * is completed. When all CPUs have executed their callback, cpu_count + * will have been decremented to 0. */ - call_rcu(&data.head, rcu_barrier_callback); + call_rcu(&head, rcu_barrier_callback); =20 - while ( atomic_read(data.cpu_count) !=3D num_online_cpus() ) + while ( atomic_read(&cpu_count) ) { process_pending_softirqs(); cpu_relax(); } =20 - local_irq_disable(); - - return 0; + atomic_dec(&pending_count); } =20 -/* - * As rcu_barrier() is using stop_machine_run() it is allowed to be used in - * idle context only (see comment for stop_machine_run()). - */ -int rcu_barrier(void) +void rcu_barrier(void) { - atomic_t cpu_count =3D ATOMIC_INIT(0); - return stop_machine_run(rcu_barrier_action, &cpu_count, NR_CPUS); + unsigned int n_cpus; + + for ( ;; ) + { + if ( !atomic_read(&pending_count) && get_cpu_maps() ) + { + n_cpus =3D num_online_cpus(); + + if ( atomic_cmpxchg(&pending_count, 0, n_cpus + 1) =3D=3D 0 ) + break; + + put_cpu_maps(); + } + + process_pending_softirqs(); + cpu_relax(); + } + + atomic_set(&cpu_count, n_cpus); + cpumask_raise_softirq(&cpu_online_map, RCU_SOFTIRQ); + + put_cpu_maps(); + + while ( atomic_read(&pending_count) !=3D 1 ) + { + process_pending_softirqs(); + cpu_relax(); + } + + atomic_set(&pending_count, 0); } =20 /* Is batch a before batch b ? */ @@ -426,6 +457,13 @@ static void rcu_process_callbacks(void) rdp->process_callbacks =3D false; __rcu_process_callbacks(&rcu_ctrlblk, rdp); } + + if ( atomic_read(&cpu_count) && !rdp->barrier_active ) + { + rdp->barrier_active =3D true; + rcu_barrier_action(); + rdp->barrier_active =3D false; + } } =20 static int __rcu_pending(struct rcu_ctrlblk *rcp, struct rcu_data *rdp) diff --git a/xen/include/xen/rcupdate.h b/xen/include/xen/rcupdate.h index eb9b60df07..31c8b86d13 100644 --- a/xen/include/xen/rcupdate.h +++ b/xen/include/xen/rcupdate.h @@ -144,7 +144,7 @@ void rcu_check_callbacks(int cpu); void call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head,=20 void (*func)(struct rcu_head *head)); =20 -int rcu_barrier(void); +void rcu_barrier(void); =20 void rcu_idle_enter(unsigned int cpu); void rcu_idle_exit(unsigned int cpu); --=20 2.16.4 _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel From nobody Tue May 7 01:31:31 2024 Delivered-To: importer@patchew.org Received-SPF: none (zohomail.com: 192.237.175.120 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of lists.xenproject.org) client-ip=192.237.175.120; envelope-from=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org; helo=lists.xenproject.org; Authentication-Results: mx.zohomail.com; spf=none (zohomail.com: 192.237.175.120 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of lists.xenproject.org) smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1584001767; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=dxZv/GglGOm37RFUSc9Ilq2X26xVYhwi+aELddgyaq6bq7jZRGYzoZfx2s3dXNFOp6dw+r3P1RTtIdaq6bcRzBKbdYx1PvtXh7+zYOyLlUGcfijKSEa14mwpEeUi2oNkofdvFj1f64M1B43XsZGZ+zcBXdaNDTlFGIfJd198maY= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1584001767; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Sender:Subject:To; bh=lpHZ0Urnq95QkupODe3x22/SDsgJMnThWeB2Wj8YdSM=; b=iCD6nVUTShhOLbZ0dneB46udFbcvF6hX8QqMXYUIb+bbOhffwo8DlX9FDkmCfIOeRe4D1YNAFS0ObacbfxX6D3JD3KNXo8jxZk90RfrTcQ49japubrMF9+F2dVxJ5AGdLrrAm/NTdvR3d7PijOuVNh3zyMnO3KZLKF9BHiFyqBs= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; spf=none (zohomail.com: 192.237.175.120 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of lists.xenproject.org) smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Return-Path: Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1584001767107440.9014588241416; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 01:29:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jCJCo-0004tp-Rw; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:28:38 +0000 Received: from all-amaz-eas1.inumbo.com ([34.197.232.57] helo=us1-amaz-eas2.inumbo.com) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jCJCn-0004te-Uw for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:28:37 +0000 Received: from mx2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.15]) by us1-amaz-eas2.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 76d89564-643b-11ea-b127-12813bfff9fa; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:28:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF02EB1E3; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:28:34 +0000 (UTC) X-Inumbo-ID: 76d89564-643b-11ea-b127-12813bfff9fa X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de From: Juergen Gross To: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 09:28:29 +0100 Message-Id: <20200312082831.22280-3-jgross@suse.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.16.4 In-Reply-To: <20200312082831.22280-1-jgross@suse.com> References: <20200312082831.22280-1-jgross@suse.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 2/4] xen: don't process rcu callbacks when holding a rcu_read_lock() X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Juergen Gross , Stefano Stabellini , Julien Grall , Wei Liu , Andrew Cooper , Ian Jackson , George Dunlap , Jan Beulich Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" Some keyhandlers are calling process_pending_softirqs() while holding a rcu_read_lock(). This is wrong, as process_pending_softirqs() might activate rcu calls which should not happen inside a rcu_read_lock(). For that purpose modify process_pending_softirqs() to not allow rcu callback processing when a rcu_read_lock() is being held. Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross --- V3: - add RCU_SOFTIRQ to ignore in process_pending_softirqs_norcu() (Roger Pau Monn=C3=A9) V5: - block rcu processing depending on rch_read_lock() being held or not (Jan Beulich) --- xen/common/softirq.c | 12 ++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/xen/common/softirq.c b/xen/common/softirq.c index b83ad96d6c..00d676b62c 100644 --- a/xen/common/softirq.c +++ b/xen/common/softirq.c @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ static void __do_softirq(unsigned long ignore_mask) { unsigned int i, cpu; unsigned long pending; + bool rcu_allowed =3D !(ignore_mask & (1ul << RCU_SOFTIRQ)); =20 for ( ; ; ) { @@ -38,7 +39,7 @@ static void __do_softirq(unsigned long ignore_mask) */ cpu =3D smp_processor_id(); =20 - if ( rcu_pending(cpu) ) + if ( rcu_allowed && rcu_pending(cpu) ) rcu_check_callbacks(cpu); =20 if ( ((pending =3D (softirq_pending(cpu) & ~ignore_mask)) =3D=3D 0) @@ -53,9 +54,16 @@ static void __do_softirq(unsigned long ignore_mask) =20 void process_pending_softirqs(void) { + unsigned long ignore_mask =3D (1ul << SCHEDULE_SOFTIRQ) | + (1ul << SCHED_SLAVE_SOFTIRQ); + + /* Block RCU processing in case of rcu_read_lock() held. */ + if ( preempt_count() ) + ignore_mask |=3D 1ul << RCU_SOFTIRQ; + ASSERT(!in_irq() && local_irq_is_enabled()); /* Do not enter scheduler as it can preempt the calling context. */ - __do_softirq((1ul << SCHEDULE_SOFTIRQ) | (1ul << SCHED_SLAVE_SOFTIRQ)); + __do_softirq(ignore_mask); } =20 void do_softirq(void) --=20 2.16.4 _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel From nobody Tue May 7 01:31:31 2024 Delivered-To: importer@patchew.org Received-SPF: none (zohomail.com: 192.237.175.120 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of lists.xenproject.org) client-ip=192.237.175.120; envelope-from=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org; helo=lists.xenproject.org; Authentication-Results: mx.zohomail.com; spf=none (zohomail.com: 192.237.175.120 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of lists.xenproject.org) smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1584001766; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=BO2r6SBF/gkvEnaethG6U+wSCwXIiBKybQCq7HACAQSBY4gQEE9XAJAGBJhwrQpWIJ/9/QbgXNQIbelCtPbT+QI/CzaTQyEo9+swbK2AVxM4DyvPlpHPuHDC7VyK/doOGjdW3QJ8GmCwZoI4iwSS+TKchWD6MNkrtBh1YKXtTZU= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1584001766; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Sender:Subject:To; bh=JeeA3HXLn+IiG0LS8xpqntr6BcKN2ZwBpoDiQH4Yyig=; b=EDwBI8DxTZXJc41LoikySY/pYHGBmN3M/D/Xu5ugFTovfAW9GZfpKS9eJxtRB1aChRmqSJvR6zlhKjyghTLVHZCL7rujDerw/NGUAkgXDyMU+bjFChctdLkeh3BTpXde7pbMbMwDGgmcZ2+ZtHt36WpZ7nbORgsJSNNDgYiRDrc= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; spf=none (zohomail.com: 192.237.175.120 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of lists.xenproject.org) smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Return-Path: Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1584001766041205.2204092280342; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 01:29:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jCJCy-0004vU-R7; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:28:48 +0000 Received: from all-amaz-eas1.inumbo.com ([34.197.232.57] helo=us1-amaz-eas2.inumbo.com) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jCJCx-0004v9-RK for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:28:47 +0000 Received: from mx2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.15]) by us1-amaz-eas2.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 76d89565-643b-11ea-b127-12813bfff9fa; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:28:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 019BBB23A; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:28:34 +0000 (UTC) X-Inumbo-ID: 76d89565-643b-11ea-b127-12813bfff9fa X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de From: Juergen Gross To: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 09:28:30 +0100 Message-Id: <20200312082831.22280-4-jgross@suse.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.16.4 In-Reply-To: <20200312082831.22280-1-jgross@suse.com> References: <20200312082831.22280-1-jgross@suse.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 3/4] xen/rcu: add assertions to debug build X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Juergen Gross , Stefano Stabellini , Julien Grall , Wei Liu , Andrew Cooper , Ian Jackson , George Dunlap , Jan Beulich Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" Xen's RCU implementation relies on no softirq handling taking place while being in a RCU critical section. Add ASSERT()s in debug builds in order to catch any violations. For that purpose modify rcu_read_[un]lock() to use a dedicated percpu counter instead of preempt_[en|dis]able() as this enables to test that condition in __do_softirq() (ASSERT_NOT_IN_ATOMIC() is not usable there due to __cpu_up() calling process_pending_softirqs() while holding the cpu hotplug lock). Dropping the now no longer needed #include of preempt.h in rcupdate.h requires adding it in some sources. While at it switch the rcu_read_[un]lock() implementation to static inline functions instead of macros. Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross --- V3: - add barriers to rcu_[en|dis]able() (Roger Pau Monn=C3=A9) - add rcu_quiesce_allowed() to ASSERT_NOT_IN_ATOMIC (Roger Pau Monn=C3=A9) - convert macros to static inline functions - add sanity check in rcu_read_unlock() V4: - use barrier() in rcu_[en|dis]able() (Julien Grall) V5: - use rcu counter even if not using a debug build --- xen/common/multicall.c | 1 + xen/common/preempt.c | 5 ++++- xen/common/rcupdate.c | 2 ++ xen/common/softirq.c | 4 +++- xen/common/wait.c | 1 + xen/include/xen/rcupdate.h | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- 6 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/xen/common/multicall.c b/xen/common/multicall.c index 5a199ebf8f..67f1a23485 100644 --- a/xen/common/multicall.c +++ b/xen/common/multicall.c @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ #include #include #include +#include #include #include #include diff --git a/xen/common/preempt.c b/xen/common/preempt.c index 3b4178fd44..8a351e644b 100644 --- a/xen/common/preempt.c +++ b/xen/common/preempt.c @@ -21,13 +21,15 @@ =20 #include #include +#include #include =20 DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned int, __preempt_count); =20 bool_t in_atomic(void) { - return preempt_count() || in_irq() || !local_irq_is_enabled(); + return preempt_count() || in_irq() || !local_irq_is_enabled() || + !rcu_quiesce_allowed(); } =20 #ifndef NDEBUG @@ -36,5 +38,6 @@ void ASSERT_NOT_IN_ATOMIC(void) ASSERT(!preempt_count()); ASSERT(!in_irq()); ASSERT(local_irq_is_enabled()); + ASSERT(rcu_quiesce_allowed()); } #endif diff --git a/xen/common/rcupdate.c b/xen/common/rcupdate.c index c5ef6acb1e..d73735235d 100644 --- a/xen/common/rcupdate.c +++ b/xen/common/rcupdate.c @@ -46,6 +46,8 @@ #include #include =20 +DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned int, rcu_lock_cnt); + /* Global control variables for rcupdate callback mechanism. */ static struct rcu_ctrlblk { long cur; /* Current batch number. */ diff --git a/xen/common/softirq.c b/xen/common/softirq.c index 00d676b62c..eba65c5fc0 100644 --- a/xen/common/softirq.c +++ b/xen/common/softirq.c @@ -31,6 +31,8 @@ static void __do_softirq(unsigned long ignore_mask) unsigned long pending; bool rcu_allowed =3D !(ignore_mask & (1ul << RCU_SOFTIRQ)); =20 + ASSERT(!rcu_allowed || rcu_quiesce_allowed()); + for ( ; ; ) { /* @@ -58,7 +60,7 @@ void process_pending_softirqs(void) (1ul << SCHED_SLAVE_SOFTIRQ); =20 /* Block RCU processing in case of rcu_read_lock() held. */ - if ( preempt_count() ) + if ( !rcu_quiesce_allowed() ) ignore_mask |=3D 1ul << RCU_SOFTIRQ; =20 ASSERT(!in_irq() && local_irq_is_enabled()); diff --git a/xen/common/wait.c b/xen/common/wait.c index 24716e7676..9cdb174036 100644 --- a/xen/common/wait.c +++ b/xen/common/wait.c @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ * along with this program; If not, see . */ =20 +#include #include #include #include diff --git a/xen/include/xen/rcupdate.h b/xen/include/xen/rcupdate.h index 31c8b86d13..be807694e7 100644 --- a/xen/include/xen/rcupdate.h +++ b/xen/include/xen/rcupdate.h @@ -32,12 +32,32 @@ #define __XEN_RCUPDATE_H =20 #include +#include #include #include -#include +#include =20 #define __rcu =20 +DECLARE_PER_CPU(unsigned int, rcu_lock_cnt); + +static inline void rcu_quiesce_disable(void) +{ + this_cpu(rcu_lock_cnt)++; + barrier(); +} + +static inline void rcu_quiesce_enable(void) +{ + barrier(); + this_cpu(rcu_lock_cnt)--; +} + +static inline bool rcu_quiesce_allowed(void) +{ + return !this_cpu(rcu_lock_cnt); +} + /** * struct rcu_head - callback structure for use with RCU * @next: next update requests in a list @@ -91,16 +111,23 @@ typedef struct _rcu_read_lock rcu_read_lock_t; * will be deferred until the outermost RCU read-side critical section * completes. * - * It is illegal to block while in an RCU read-side critical section. + * It is illegal to process softirqs while in an RCU read-side critical se= ction. */ -#define rcu_read_lock(x) ({ ((void)(x)); preempt_disable(); }) +static inline void rcu_read_lock(rcu_read_lock_t *lock) +{ + rcu_quiesce_disable(); +} =20 /** * rcu_read_unlock - marks the end of an RCU read-side critical section. * * See rcu_read_lock() for more information. */ -#define rcu_read_unlock(x) ({ ((void)(x)); preempt_enable(); }) +static inline void rcu_read_unlock(rcu_read_lock_t *lock) +{ + ASSERT(!rcu_quiesce_allowed()); + rcu_quiesce_enable(); +} =20 /* * So where is rcu_write_lock()? It does not exist, as there is no --=20 2.16.4 _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel From nobody Tue May 7 01:31:31 2024 Delivered-To: importer@patchew.org Received-SPF: none (zohomail.com: 192.237.175.120 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of lists.xenproject.org) client-ip=192.237.175.120; envelope-from=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org; helo=lists.xenproject.org; Authentication-Results: mx.zohomail.com; spf=none (zohomail.com: 192.237.175.120 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of lists.xenproject.org) smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1584001767; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=QdIeSIp3C/gyc0DSiYJ6it7raiBMM2T84+eCw+LRyp/XcE2Riy+IUdkOUhrmk5ewJm8CKO/G/oEhqBCUPZHXvVS/oKNlKAqfWNoecMQpIMHAdjS/DJlvCS9QOtgKS1Caqnpv27mvpXlv6QzpLuauXtnY9RDQ4e/ejSwOnH6rcTQ= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1584001767; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Sender:Subject:To; bh=QNmMkgHZtI+4EpNw+GemCgRYQG9ykz3AQ6uIPYEMqfA=; b=IM7oWQ2xeuuVGVO40ICNE6OS9t02JtnsgQhswrW1xkfWW2/ygQRUwQP5aaNilbdZ4igKKvpte8kVzaAsUWl/VNV8fzyJTY3uSYgIdI1sAFndeeAj8oOyIEU7AWupxifS69iPORyWvqD8F26cBLqmSti5oF15MY+NLYMBz/QJkF0= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; spf=none (zohomail.com: 192.237.175.120 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of lists.xenproject.org) smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Return-Path: Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1584001767007707.0078534553803; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 01:29:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jCJCu-0004uK-Dm; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:28:44 +0000 Received: from all-amaz-eas1.inumbo.com ([34.197.232.57] helo=us1-amaz-eas2.inumbo.com) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jCJCs-0004u0-RD for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:28:42 +0000 Received: from mx2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.15]) by us1-amaz-eas2.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 76d89566-643b-11ea-b127-12813bfff9fa; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:28:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3401EB24A; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:28:35 +0000 (UTC) X-Inumbo-ID: 76d89566-643b-11ea-b127-12813bfff9fa X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de From: Juergen Gross To: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 09:28:31 +0100 Message-Id: <20200312082831.22280-5-jgross@suse.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.16.4 In-Reply-To: <20200312082831.22280-1-jgross@suse.com> References: <20200312082831.22280-1-jgross@suse.com> Subject: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 4/4] xen/rcu: add per-lock counter in debug builds X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Juergen Gross , Stefano Stabellini , Julien Grall , Wei Liu , Andrew Cooper , Ian Jackson , George Dunlap , Jan Beulich MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" Add a lock specific counter to rcu read locks in debug builds. This allows to test for matching lock/unlock calls. This will help to avoid cases like the one fixed by commit 98ed1f43cc2c89 where different rcu read locks were referenced in the lock and unlock calls. Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross --- V5: - updated commit message (Jan Beulich) --- xen/include/xen/rcupdate.h | 46 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------= ---- 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) diff --git a/xen/include/xen/rcupdate.h b/xen/include/xen/rcupdate.h index be807694e7..3e9b0b180e 100644 --- a/xen/include/xen/rcupdate.h +++ b/xen/include/xen/rcupdate.h @@ -36,20 +36,49 @@ #include #include #include +#include =20 #define __rcu =20 +#ifndef NDEBUG +/* * Lock type for passing to rcu_read_{lock,unlock}. */ +struct _rcu_read_lock { + atomic_t cnt; +}; +typedef struct _rcu_read_lock rcu_read_lock_t; +#define DEFINE_RCU_READ_LOCK(x) rcu_read_lock_t x =3D { .cnt =3D ATOMIC_IN= IT(0) } +#define RCU_READ_LOCK_INIT(x) atomic_set(&(x)->cnt, 0) + +#else +/* + * Dummy lock type for passing to rcu_read_{lock,unlock}. Currently exists + * only to document the reason for rcu_read_lock() critical sections. + */ +struct _rcu_read_lock {}; +typedef struct _rcu_read_lock rcu_read_lock_t; +#define DEFINE_RCU_READ_LOCK(x) rcu_read_lock_t x +#define RCU_READ_LOCK_INIT(x) + +#endif + DECLARE_PER_CPU(unsigned int, rcu_lock_cnt); =20 -static inline void rcu_quiesce_disable(void) +static inline void rcu_quiesce_disable(rcu_read_lock_t *lock) { this_cpu(rcu_lock_cnt)++; +#ifndef NDEBUG + atomic_inc(&lock->cnt); +#endif barrier(); } =20 -static inline void rcu_quiesce_enable(void) +static inline void rcu_quiesce_enable(rcu_read_lock_t *lock) { barrier(); +#ifndef NDEBUG + ASSERT(atomic_read(&lock->cnt)); + atomic_dec(&lock->cnt); +#endif this_cpu(rcu_lock_cnt)--; } =20 @@ -78,15 +107,6 @@ struct rcu_head { int rcu_pending(int cpu); int rcu_needs_cpu(int cpu); =20 -/* - * Dummy lock type for passing to rcu_read_{lock,unlock}. Currently exists - * only to document the reason for rcu_read_lock() critical sections. - */ -struct _rcu_read_lock {}; -typedef struct _rcu_read_lock rcu_read_lock_t; -#define DEFINE_RCU_READ_LOCK(x) rcu_read_lock_t x -#define RCU_READ_LOCK_INIT(x) - /** * rcu_read_lock - mark the beginning of an RCU read-side critical section. * @@ -115,7 +135,7 @@ typedef struct _rcu_read_lock rcu_read_lock_t; */ static inline void rcu_read_lock(rcu_read_lock_t *lock) { - rcu_quiesce_disable(); + rcu_quiesce_disable(lock); } =20 /** @@ -126,7 +146,7 @@ static inline void rcu_read_lock(rcu_read_lock_t *lock) static inline void rcu_read_unlock(rcu_read_lock_t *lock) { ASSERT(!rcu_quiesce_allowed()); - rcu_quiesce_enable(); + rcu_quiesce_enable(lock); } =20 /* --=20 2.16.4 _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel