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;
Date:   Tue, 3 Aug 2021 16:43:52 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To:     Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rcu@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] rcutorture: Don't disable softirqs with preemption
 disabled when PREEMPT_RT
Message-ID: <20210803234352.GX4397@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
Reply-To: paulmck@kernel.org
References: <20210803225437.3612591-1-valentin.schneider@arm.com>
 <20210803225437.3612591-2-valentin.schneider@arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210803225437.3612591-2-valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 11:54:36PM +0100, Valentin Schneider wrote:
> Running RCU torture with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT under v5.13-rt1 triggers:
> 
> [   10.821700] DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(this_cpu_read(softirq_ctrl.cnt))
> [   10.821716] WARNING: CPU: 5 PID: 137 at kernel/softirq.c:173 __local_bh_disable_ip (kernel/softirq.c:173 (discriminator 31))
> [   10.821739] Modules linked in:
> [   10.821749] CPU: 5 PID: 137 Comm: rcu_torture_rea Not tainted 5.13.0-rt1-00005-g08bbda29766a #129
> [   10.821759] Hardware name: ARM Juno development board (r0) (DT)
> [   10.821765] pstate: 60000005 (nZCv daif -PAN -UAO -TCO BTYPE=--)
> [   10.821938] Call trace:
> [   10.821941] __local_bh_disable_ip (kernel/softirq.c:173 (discriminator 31))
> [   10.821950] rcutorture_one_extend (./include/linux/rcupdate.h:274 ./include/linux/rcupdate.h:737 kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c:1443)
> [   10.821960] rcu_torture_one_read (kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c:1590 kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c:1638)
> [   10.821968] rcu_torture_reader (kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c:1730)
> [   10.821976] kthread (kernel/kthread.c:321)
> [   10.821986] ret_from_fork (arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S:1005)
> [   10.821997] irq event stamp: 478635
> [   10.822001] hardirqs last enabled at (478635): _raw_spin_unlock_irq (./arch/arm64/include/asm/irqflags.h:35 ./include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:168 kernel/locking/spinlock.c:202)
> [   10.822016] hardirqs last disabled at (478634): __schedule (kernel/sched/core.c:5154 (discriminator 1))
> [   10.822029] softirqs last enabled at (478626): __local_bh_enable_ip (./arch/arm64/include/asm/irqflags.h:85 kernel/softirq.c:262)
> [   10.822040] softirqs last disabled at (478622): rcutorture_one_extend (./include/linux/bottom_half.h:19 kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c:1441)
> 
> Per this warning, softirqs cannot be disabled in a non-preemptible region
> under CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT. Adjust RCU torture accordingly.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
> ---
>  kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c b/kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c
> index 6096a7d14342..680f66b65f14 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c
> @@ -1537,6 +1537,8 @@ rcutorture_extend_mask(int oldmask, struct torture_random_state *trsp)
>  	 * them on non-RT.
>  	 */
>  	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT)) {

This depends on some rcutorture patches in -rt that are not yet in
-rcu.  Would -rt be a good place for this one, or are those patches
now ready for -rcu?

							Thanx, Paul

> +		/* Can't disable bh in atomic context under PREEMPT_RT */
> +		mask &= ~(RCUTORTURE_RDR_ATOM_BH | RCUTORTURE_RDR_ATOM_RBH);
>  		/*
>  		 * Can't release the outermost rcu lock in an irq disabled
>  		 * section without preemption also being disabled, if irqs
> -- 
> 2.25.1
>