Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 4 Oct 2022 19:21:45 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
        linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: Fix missing SIGTRAPs due to pending_disable abuse
Message-ID: <YzxrqUFBNy/kR6PZ@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20220927121322.1236730-1-elver@google.com>
 <YzM/BUsBnX18NoOG@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <YzNu5bgASbuVi0S3@elver.google.com>
 <YzQcqe9p9C5ZbjZ1@elver.google.com>
 <YzRgcnMXWuUZ4rlt@elver.google.com>
 <Yzxou9HB/1XjMXWI@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Yzxou9HB/1XjMXWI@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 07:09:15PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 04:55:46PM +0200, Marco Elver wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 12:06PM +0200, Marco Elver wrote:
> > 
> > > My second idea about introducing something like irq_work_raw_sync().
> > > Maybe it's not that crazy if it is actually safe. I expect this case
> > > where we need the irq_work_raw_sync() to be very very rare.
> > 
> > The previous irq_work_raw_sync() forgot about irq_work_queue_on(). Alas,
> > I might still be missing something obvious, because "it's never that
> > easy". ;-)
> > 
> > And for completeness, the full perf patch of what it would look like
> > together with irq_work_raw_sync() (consider it v1.5). It's already
> > survived some shorter stress tests and fuzzing.
> 
> So.... I don't like it. But I cooked up the below, which _almost_ works :-/
> 
> For some raisin it sometimes fails with 14999 out of 15000 events
> delivered and I've not yet figured out where it goes sideways. I'm
> currently thinking it's that sigtrap clear on OFF.

Oh Urgh, this is ofcourse the case where an IPI races with a migration
and we loose the race with return to use. Effectively giving the signal
skid vs the hardware event.

Bah.. I really hate having one CPU wait for another... Let me see if I
can find another way to close that hole.