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 16:25:57 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To:     Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Cc:     Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>,
        "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: <20180625162557.7140664c@gandalf.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <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>
        <20180625163951.GA52646@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:39:51 -0700
Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org> wrote:

> 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

Nice write up. I may point some people to this ;-)

Anyway "complications due to nested NMIs (yes NMIs can nest!)"

What arch allows for NMIs to nest. Because we don't let that happen on
x86, and there's code that I know of that is called by NMIs that is not
re-entrant, and can crash if we allow for NMIs to nest. For example
"in_nmi()" will not show that we are in_nmi() if we allow for nesting
of NMIs. It has a single bit that gets incremented when we enter NMI
code, and cleared when we leave it.

-- Steve