For PREEMPT_RT kernel, the spin_lock, spin_lock_irq will converted
to sleepable rt_spin_lock and the interrupt related suffix for
spin_lock/unlock(_irq, irqsave/irqrestore) do not affect CPU's
interrupt state. this commit therefore add raw_spin_lock torture
tests, this is a strict spin lock implementation in RT kernels.
Signed-off-by: Zqiang <[email protected]>
---
kernel/locking/locktorture.c | 58 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 58 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
index 9425aff08936..521197366f27 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
@@ -257,6 +257,61 @@ static struct lock_torture_ops spin_lock_irq_ops = {
.name = "spin_lock_irq"
};
+#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
+static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(torture_raw_spinlock);
+
+static int torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock(int tid __maybe_unused)
+__acquires(torture_raw_spinlock)
+{
+ raw_spin_lock(&torture_raw_spinlock);
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static void torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock(int tid __maybe_unused)
+__releases(torture_raw_spinlock)
+{
+ raw_spin_unlock(&torture_raw_spinlock);
+}
+
+static struct lock_torture_ops raw_spin_lock_ops = {
+ .writelock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock,
+ .write_delay = torture_spin_lock_write_delay,
+ .task_boost = torture_rt_boost,
+ .writeunlock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock,
+ .readlock = NULL,
+ .read_delay = NULL,
+ .readunlock = NULL,
+ .name = "raw_spin_lock"
+};
+
+static int torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock_irq(int tid __maybe_unused)
+__acquires(torture_raw_spinlock)
+{
+ unsigned long flags;
+
+ raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&torture_raw_spinlock, flags);
+ cxt.cur_ops->flags = flags;
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static void torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock_irq(int tid __maybe_unused)
+__releases(torture_raw_spinlock)
+{
+ raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&torture_raw_spinlock, cxt.cur_ops->flags);
+}
+
+static struct lock_torture_ops raw_spin_lock_irq_ops = {
+ .writelock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock_irq,
+ .write_delay = torture_spin_lock_write_delay,
+ .task_boost = torture_rt_boost,
+ .writeunlock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock_irq,
+ .readlock = NULL,
+ .read_delay = NULL,
+ .readunlock = NULL,
+ .name = "raw_spin_lock_irq"
+};
+#endif
+
static DEFINE_RWLOCK(torture_rwlock);
static int torture_rwlock_write_lock(int tid __maybe_unused)
@@ -1017,6 +1072,9 @@ static int __init lock_torture_init(void)
static struct lock_torture_ops *torture_ops[] = {
&lock_busted_ops,
&spin_lock_ops, &spin_lock_irq_ops,
+#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
+ &raw_spin_lock_ops, &raw_spin_lock_irq_ops,
+#endif
&rw_lock_ops, &rw_lock_irq_ops,
&mutex_lock_ops,
&ww_mutex_lock_ops,
--
2.25.1
On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 02:10:35PM +0800, Zqiang wrote:
> For PREEMPT_RT kernel, the spin_lock, spin_lock_irq will converted
> to sleepable rt_spin_lock and the interrupt related suffix for
> spin_lock/unlock(_irq, irqsave/irqrestore) do not affect CPU's
> interrupt state. this commit therefore add raw_spin_lock torture
> tests, this is a strict spin lock implementation in RT kernels.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zqiang <[email protected]>
A nice addition! Is this something you will be testing regularly?
If not, should there be additional locktorture scenarios, perhaps prefixed
by "RT-" to hint that they are not normally available?
Or did you have some other plan for making use of these?
Thanx, Paul
> ---
> kernel/locking/locktorture.c | 58 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 58 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
> index 9425aff08936..521197366f27 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
> @@ -257,6 +257,61 @@ static struct lock_torture_ops spin_lock_irq_ops = {
> .name = "spin_lock_irq"
> };
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> +static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(torture_raw_spinlock);
> +
> +static int torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock(int tid __maybe_unused)
> +__acquires(torture_raw_spinlock)
> +{
> + raw_spin_lock(&torture_raw_spinlock);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock(int tid __maybe_unused)
> +__releases(torture_raw_spinlock)
> +{
> + raw_spin_unlock(&torture_raw_spinlock);
> +}
> +
> +static struct lock_torture_ops raw_spin_lock_ops = {
> + .writelock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock,
> + .write_delay = torture_spin_lock_write_delay,
> + .task_boost = torture_rt_boost,
> + .writeunlock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock,
> + .readlock = NULL,
> + .read_delay = NULL,
> + .readunlock = NULL,
> + .name = "raw_spin_lock"
> +};
> +
> +static int torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock_irq(int tid __maybe_unused)
> +__acquires(torture_raw_spinlock)
> +{
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&torture_raw_spinlock, flags);
> + cxt.cur_ops->flags = flags;
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock_irq(int tid __maybe_unused)
> +__releases(torture_raw_spinlock)
> +{
> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&torture_raw_spinlock, cxt.cur_ops->flags);
> +}
> +
> +static struct lock_torture_ops raw_spin_lock_irq_ops = {
> + .writelock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock_irq,
> + .write_delay = torture_spin_lock_write_delay,
> + .task_boost = torture_rt_boost,
> + .writeunlock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock_irq,
> + .readlock = NULL,
> + .read_delay = NULL,
> + .readunlock = NULL,
> + .name = "raw_spin_lock_irq"
> +};
> +#endif
> +
> static DEFINE_RWLOCK(torture_rwlock);
>
> static int torture_rwlock_write_lock(int tid __maybe_unused)
> @@ -1017,6 +1072,9 @@ static int __init lock_torture_init(void)
> static struct lock_torture_ops *torture_ops[] = {
> &lock_busted_ops,
> &spin_lock_ops, &spin_lock_irq_ops,
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> + &raw_spin_lock_ops, &raw_spin_lock_irq_ops,
> +#endif
> &rw_lock_ops, &rw_lock_irq_ops,
> &mutex_lock_ops,
> &ww_mutex_lock_ops,
> --
> 2.25.1
>
>On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 02:10:35PM +0800, Zqiang wrote:
> For PREEMPT_RT kernel, the spin_lock, spin_lock_irq will converted
> to sleepable rt_spin_lock and the interrupt related suffix for
> spin_lock/unlock(_irq, irqsave/irqrestore) do not affect CPU's
> interrupt state. this commit therefore add raw_spin_lock torture
> tests, this is a strict spin lock implementation in RT kernels.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zqiang <[email protected]>
>
>A nice addition! Is this something you will be testing regularly?
>If not, should there be additional locktorture scenarios, perhaps prefixed
>by "RT-" to hint that they are not normally available?
>
>Or did you have some other plan for making use of these?
Hi Paul
Thanks for reply, in fact, I want to enrich the test of locktorture,
after all, under the PREEMPT_RT kernel, we lost the test of the
real spin lock.
Thanks
Zqiang
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
> ---
> kernel/locking/locktorture.c | 58 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 58 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
> index 9425aff08936..521197366f27 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
> @@ -257,6 +257,61 @@ static struct lock_torture_ops spin_lock_irq_ops = {
> .name = "spin_lock_irq"
> };
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> +static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(torture_raw_spinlock);
> +
> +static int torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock(int tid __maybe_unused)
> +__acquires(torture_raw_spinlock)
> +{
> + raw_spin_lock(&torture_raw_spinlock);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock(int tid __maybe_unused)
> +__releases(torture_raw_spinlock)
> +{
> + raw_spin_unlock(&torture_raw_spinlock);
> +}
> +
> +static struct lock_torture_ops raw_spin_lock_ops = {
> + .writelock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock,
> + .write_delay = torture_spin_lock_write_delay,
> + .task_boost = torture_rt_boost,
> + .writeunlock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock,
> + .readlock = NULL,
> + .read_delay = NULL,
> + .readunlock = NULL,
> + .name = "raw_spin_lock"
> +};
> +
> +static int torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock_irq(int tid __maybe_unused)
> +__acquires(torture_raw_spinlock)
> +{
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&torture_raw_spinlock, flags);
> + cxt.cur_ops->flags = flags;
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock_irq(int tid __maybe_unused)
> +__releases(torture_raw_spinlock)
> +{
> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&torture_raw_spinlock, cxt.cur_ops->flags);
> +}
> +
> +static struct lock_torture_ops raw_spin_lock_irq_ops = {
> + .writelock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock_irq,
> + .write_delay = torture_spin_lock_write_delay,
> + .task_boost = torture_rt_boost,
> + .writeunlock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock_irq,
> + .readlock = NULL,
> + .read_delay = NULL,
> + .readunlock = NULL,
> + .name = "raw_spin_lock_irq"
> +};
> +#endif
> +
> static DEFINE_RWLOCK(torture_rwlock);
>
> static int torture_rwlock_write_lock(int tid __maybe_unused)
> @@ -1017,6 +1072,9 @@ static int __init lock_torture_init(void)
> static struct lock_torture_ops *torture_ops[] = {
> &lock_busted_ops,
> &spin_lock_ops, &spin_lock_irq_ops,
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> + &raw_spin_lock_ops, &raw_spin_lock_irq_ops,
> +#endif
> &rw_lock_ops, &rw_lock_irq_ops,
> &mutex_lock_ops,
> &ww_mutex_lock_ops,
> --
> 2.25.1
>
On Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 05:04:41AM +0000, Zhang, Qiang1 wrote:
>
> >On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 02:10:35PM +0800, Zqiang wrote:
> > For PREEMPT_RT kernel, the spin_lock, spin_lock_irq will converted
> > to sleepable rt_spin_lock and the interrupt related suffix for
> > spin_lock/unlock(_irq, irqsave/irqrestore) do not affect CPU's
> > interrupt state. this commit therefore add raw_spin_lock torture
> > tests, this is a strict spin lock implementation in RT kernels.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Zqiang <[email protected]>
> >
> >A nice addition! Is this something you will be testing regularly?
> >If not, should there be additional locktorture scenarios, perhaps prefixed
> >by "RT-" to hint that they are not normally available?
> >
> >Or did you have some other plan for making use of these?
>
> Hi Paul
>
> Thanks for reply, in fact, I want to enrich the test of locktorture,
> after all, under the PREEMPT_RT kernel, we lost the test of the
> real spin lock.
Very well, how does the following look?
Thanx, Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
commit edc9d419ee8c22821ffd664466a5cf19208c3f02
Author: Zqiang <[email protected]>
Date: Wed Feb 15 14:10:35 2023 +0800
locktorture: Add raw_spinlock* torture tests for PREEMPT_RT kernels
In PREEMPT_RT kernels, both spin_lock() and spin_lock_irq() are converted
to sleepable rt_spin_lock(). This means that the interrupt related suffix
for spin_lock/unlock(_irq, irqsave/irqrestore) do not affect the CPU's
interrupt state. This commit therefore adds raw spin-lock torture tests.
This in turn permits pure spin locks to be tested in PREEMPT_RT kernels.
Signed-off-by: Zqiang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <[email protected]>
diff --git a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
index 9425aff089365..ed8e5baafe49f 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
@@ -257,6 +257,61 @@ static struct lock_torture_ops spin_lock_irq_ops = {
.name = "spin_lock_irq"
};
+#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
+static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(torture_raw_spinlock);
+
+static int torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock(int tid __maybe_unused)
+__acquires(torture_raw_spinlock)
+{
+ raw_spin_lock(&torture_raw_spinlock);
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static void torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock(int tid __maybe_unused)
+__releases(torture_raw_spinlock)
+{
+ raw_spin_unlock(&torture_raw_spinlock);
+}
+
+static struct lock_torture_ops raw_spin_lock_ops = {
+ .writelock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock,
+ .write_delay = torture_spin_lock_write_delay,
+ .task_boost = torture_rt_boost,
+ .writeunlock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock,
+ .readlock = NULL,
+ .read_delay = NULL,
+ .readunlock = NULL,
+ .name = "raw_spin_lock"
+};
+
+static int torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock_irq(int tid __maybe_unused)
+__acquires(torture_raw_spinlock)
+{
+ unsigned long flags;
+
+ raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&torture_raw_spinlock, flags);
+ cxt.cur_ops->flags = flags;
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static void torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock_irq(int tid __maybe_unused)
+__releases(torture_raw_spinlock)
+{
+ raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&torture_raw_spinlock, cxt.cur_ops->flags);
+}
+
+static struct lock_torture_ops raw_spin_lock_irq_ops = {
+ .writelock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock_irq,
+ .write_delay = torture_spin_lock_write_delay,
+ .task_boost = torture_rt_boost,
+ .writeunlock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock_irq,
+ .readlock = NULL,
+ .read_delay = NULL,
+ .readunlock = NULL,
+ .name = "raw_spin_lock_irq"
+};
+#endif // #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
+
static DEFINE_RWLOCK(torture_rwlock);
static int torture_rwlock_write_lock(int tid __maybe_unused)
@@ -1017,6 +1072,9 @@ static int __init lock_torture_init(void)
static struct lock_torture_ops *torture_ops[] = {
&lock_busted_ops,
&spin_lock_ops, &spin_lock_irq_ops,
+#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
+ &raw_spin_lock_ops, &raw_spin_lock_irq_ops,
+#endif // #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
&rw_lock_ops, &rw_lock_irq_ops,
&mutex_lock_ops,
&ww_mutex_lock_ops,
On Wed, 22 Feb 2023, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>commit edc9d419ee8c22821ffd664466a5cf19208c3f02
>Author: Zqiang <[email protected]>
>Date: Wed Feb 15 14:10:35 2023 +0800
>
> locktorture: Add raw_spinlock* torture tests for PREEMPT_RT kernels
>
> In PREEMPT_RT kernels, both spin_lock() and spin_lock_irq() are converted
> to sleepable rt_spin_lock(). This means that the interrupt related suffix
> for spin_lock/unlock(_irq, irqsave/irqrestore) do not affect the CPU's
> interrupt state. This commit therefore adds raw spin-lock torture tests.
> This in turn permits pure spin locks to be tested in PREEMPT_RT kernels.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zqiang <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <[email protected]>
This is a nice addition, thanks. Just one comment below.
>diff --git a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
>index 9425aff089365..ed8e5baafe49f 100644
>--- a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
>+++ b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
>@@ -257,6 +257,61 @@ static struct lock_torture_ops spin_lock_irq_ops = {
> .name = "spin_lock_irq"
> };
>
>+#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
>+static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(torture_raw_spinlock);
How about leaving raw spinlocks regardless of preempt-rt, and instead
change the default lock (which is spin_lock) based on CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
and use the raw one in that case?
Thanks,
Davidlohr
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 07:53:59PM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Feb 2023, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > commit edc9d419ee8c22821ffd664466a5cf19208c3f02
> > Author: Zqiang <[email protected]>
> > Date: Wed Feb 15 14:10:35 2023 +0800
> >
> > locktorture: Add raw_spinlock* torture tests for PREEMPT_RT kernels
> >
> > In PREEMPT_RT kernels, both spin_lock() and spin_lock_irq() are converted
> > to sleepable rt_spin_lock(). This means that the interrupt related suffix
> > for spin_lock/unlock(_irq, irqsave/irqrestore) do not affect the CPU's
> > interrupt state. This commit therefore adds raw spin-lock torture tests.
> > This in turn permits pure spin locks to be tested in PREEMPT_RT kernels.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Zqiang <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <[email protected]>
>
> This is a nice addition, thanks. Just one comment below.
>
> > diff --git a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
> > index 9425aff089365..ed8e5baafe49f 100644
> > --- a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
> > +++ b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
> > @@ -257,6 +257,61 @@ static struct lock_torture_ops spin_lock_irq_ops = {
> > .name = "spin_lock_irq"
> > };
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> > +static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(torture_raw_spinlock);
>
> How about leaving raw spinlocks regardless of preempt-rt, and instead
> change the default lock (which is spin_lock) based on CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> and use the raw one in that case?
That makes a lot of sense to me! In fact, I tested this by deleting
those #ifdef statements. ;-)
Zqiang, would you like to take the patch and make that change, with
attribution?
Thanx, Paul
> On Wed, 22 Feb 2023, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > commit edc9d419ee8c22821ffd664466a5cf19208c3f02
> > Author: Zqiang <[email protected]>
> > Date: Wed Feb 15 14:10:35 2023 +0800
> >
> > locktorture: Add raw_spinlock* torture tests for PREEMPT_RT kernels
> >
> > In PREEMPT_RT kernels, both spin_lock() and spin_lock_irq() are converted
> > to sleepable rt_spin_lock(). This means that the interrupt related suffix
> > for spin_lock/unlock(_irq, irqsave/irqrestore) do not affect the CPU's
> > interrupt state. This commit therefore adds raw spin-lock torture tests.
> > This in turn permits pure spin locks to be tested in PREEMPT_RT kernels.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Zqiang <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <[email protected]>
>
> This is a nice addition, thanks. Just one comment below.
>
> > diff --git a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
> > index 9425aff089365..ed8e5baafe49f 100644
> > --- a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
> > +++ b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
> > @@ -257,6 +257,61 @@ static struct lock_torture_ops spin_lock_irq_ops = {
> > .name = "spin_lock_irq"
> > };
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> > +static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(torture_raw_spinlock);
>
> How about leaving raw spinlocks regardless of preempt-rt, and instead
> change the default lock (which is spin_lock) based on CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> and use the raw one in that case?
>
>That makes a lot of sense to me! In fact, I tested this by deleting
>those #ifdef statements. ;-)
>
>Zqiang, would you like to take the patch and make that change, with
>attribution?
If I understand correctly, I should remove #ifdef statements, right?
If yes, I will change and resend ????.
Thanks
Zqiang
>
> Thanx, Paul
On Thu, 23 Feb 2023, Zhang, Qiang1 wrote:
>If I understand correctly, I should remove #ifdef statements, right?
Yes, but also please make torture_type default depend on PREEMPT_RT.
Thanks,
Davidlohr