Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86@kernel.org,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@oracle.com>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
        Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
        Wei Liu <wei.liu@kernel.org>,
        Michael Kelley <mikelley@microsoft.com>,
        Jason Chen CJ <jason.cj.chen@intel.com>,
        Zhao Yakui <yakui.zhao@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [patch V6 04/37] x86: Make hardware latency tracing explicit
In-Reply-To: <20200518080814.GJ2940@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20200515234547.710474468@linutronix.de> <20200515235124.783722942@linutronix.de> <20200518080133.GI2940@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <874ksdzmzf.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <20200518080814.GJ2940@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Wed, 20 May 2020 22:09:42 +0200
Message-ID: <87imgqv055.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> writes:
> On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 10:05:56AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> writes:
>> > On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 01:45:51AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> >> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/nmi.c
>> >> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/nmi.c
>> >> @@ -334,6 +334,7 @@ static noinstr void default_do_nmi(struc
>> >>  	__this_cpu_write(last_nmi_rip, regs->ip);
>> >>  
>> >>  	instrumentation_begin();
>> >> +	ftrace_nmi_handler_enter();
>> >>  
>> >>  	handled = nmi_handle(NMI_LOCAL, regs);
>> >>  	__this_cpu_add(nmi_stats.normal, handled);
>> >> @@ -420,6 +421,7 @@ static noinstr void default_do_nmi(struc
>> >>  		unknown_nmi_error(reason, regs);
>> >>  
>> >>  out:
>> >> +	ftrace_nmi_handler_exit();
>> >>  	instrumentation_end();
>> >>  }
>> >
>> > Yeah, so I'm confused about this and the previous patch too. Why not
>> > do just this? Remove that ftrace_nmi_handler.* crud from
>> > nmi_{enter,exit}() and stick it here? Why do we needs the
>> > nmi_{enter,exit}_notrace() thing?
>> 
>> Because you then have to fixup _all_ architectures which use
>> nmi_enter/exit().
>
> We probably have to anyway. But I can do that later I suppose.

Second thoughts. For #DB and #INT3 we can just keep nmi_enter(), needs
just annotation in nmi_enter() around that trace muck.

For #NMI and #MCE I rather avoid the early trace call and do it once we
have reached "stable" state, i.e. avoid it in the whole nested NMI mess.

Thanks,

        tglx