Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:39:51 -0700
From:   Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
To:     Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Cc:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Byungchul Park <max.byungchul.park@gmail.com>,
        jiangshanlai@gmail.com, josh@joshtriplett.org,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@lge.com, luto@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/2] rcu: Remove ->dynticks_nmi_nesting from struct
 rcu_dynticks
Message-ID: <20180625163951.GA52646@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com>
References: <1529484440-20634-2-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com>
 <20180620145814.GQ3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <CANrsvRMYc5u3L53nnnGC6p-QcjBTfLPjkJGZyubGWAPauc-W8w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180620164902.GW3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <20180622055659.GA255098@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com>
 <20180622132843.GN3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <20180622181916.GA13628@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com>
 <20180622143247.781028b1@gandalf.local.home>
 <20180622200548.GA114655@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com>
 <20180625082824.GB21377@X58A-UD3R>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180625082824.GB21377@X58A-UD3R>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 05:28:24PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 01:05:48PM -0700, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 02:32:47PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 11:19:16 -0700
> > > Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Sure. So in a later thread you mentioned "usermode helpers". I took a closer
> > > > look at that subsystem, and it seems you can execute usermode helpers from
> > > > atomic sections with help of UMH_NO_WAIT flag.
> > > > 
> > > > Then I checked where this flag is used and it turns out its from the
> > > > mce_work_trigger function in x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/dev-mcelog.c which can be
> > > > called infact from an interrupt context (mce_notify_irq).
> > > > 
> > > > Is this the usecase you remember causing this weird transitions to userspace?
> > > 
> > > But this case still looks like it uses work queues, it just doesn't
> > > wait for the result.
> > > 
> > > I'll have to look at the code from what it looked like back in 2011, to
> > > see if there was an actual issue here back then.
> > 
> > Good point Steve. So I guess in the current kernel sources, there's no code
> > that uses UMH in IRQ context AFAICT. I'll go through the google group thread
> > Paul pointed as well to study the history of the problem a bit more.
> 
> Me too. Good discussion we had thanks to you, Joel.

No problem, thanks for the patch in the first place which triggered this
discussion.

For whatever its worth, I made some notes of what I understood from reading
the code and old posts because I was sure I would otherwise forget
everything:
http://www.joelfernandes.org/linuxinternals/2018/06/15/rcu-dynticks.html

Feel free to comment on that post directly (or here) if you feel something is
grossly wrong.

Again thank you and everyone for the discussion! ;-)

 - Joel