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;
Message-ID: <561ab28b18c31fbc221f4cb0c4df6db9b0538675.camel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcutorture: Avoid problematic critical section nesting
 on RT
From:   Scott Wood <swood@redhat.com>
To:     paulmck@kernel.org,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc:     Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@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>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
        Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
        Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>,
        Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
        Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Date:   Thu, 19 Aug 2021 23:11:12 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20210819182035.GF4126399@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
References: <20210811201354.1976839-1-valentin.schneider@arm.com>
         <20210811201354.1976839-2-valentin.schneider@arm.com>
         <20210817121345.5iyj5epemczn3a52@linutronix.de>
         <20210817131741.evduh4fw7vyv2dzt@linutronix.de>
         <20210817144018.nqssoq475vitrqlv@linutronix.de>
         <20210818224651.GY4126399@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
         <20210819153927.clqxr4f7qegpflbr@linutronix.de>
         <20210819154708.3efz6jtgwtuhpeds@linutronix.de>
         <20210819182035.GF4126399@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
Organization: Red Hat
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.36.5 (3.36.5-2.fc32) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 2021-08-19 at 11:20 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 05:47:08PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > On 2021-08-19 17:39:29 [+0200], To Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > +	/*
> > > +	 * Ideally these sequences would be detected in debug builds
> > > +	 * (regardless of RT), but until then don't stop testing
> > > +	 * them on non-RT.
> > > +	 */
> > > +	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT)) {
> > > +		/*
> > > +		 * Can't release the outermost rcu lock in an irq disabled
> > > +		 * section without preemption also being disabled, if irqs
> > > +		 * had ever been enabled during this RCU critical section
> > > +		 * (could leak a special flag and delay reporting the qs).
> > > +		 */
> > > +		if ((oldmask & RCUTORTURE_RDR_RCU) &&
> > > +		    (mask & RCUTORTURE_RDR_IRQ) &&
> > > +		    !(mask & preempts))
> > > +			mask |= RCUTORTURE_RDR_RCU;
> > 
> > This piece above, I don't understand. I had it running for a while and
> > it didn't explode. Let me try TREE01 for 30min without that piece.
> 
> This might be historical.  There was a time when interrupts being
> disabled across rcu_read_unlock() meant that preemption had to have
> been disabled across the entire RCU read-side critical section.
> 
> I am not seeing a purpose for it now, but I could easily be missing
> something, especially given my tenuous grasp of RT.

Yeah, I think this was to deal with not having the irq work stuff in RT
at the time.

-Scott