Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6176C61DA4 for ; Sat, 18 Feb 2023 19:34:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229595AbjBRTeo (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Feb 2023 14:34:44 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:60062 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229472AbjBRTem (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Feb 2023 14:34:42 -0500 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [139.178.84.217]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D925A12BC1 for ; Sat, 18 Feb 2023 11:34:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F2A560B81 for ; Sat, 18 Feb 2023 19:34:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9DC6EC433EF; Sat, 18 Feb 2023 19:34:40 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1676748880; bh=J8R7tycmH1fFJwxe7RtFsmH6kS9YO9Df/2j/ET27ZGc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Reply-To:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=N8QqmAuxa0EVfhSozi4NbGPndGwfmqrimGk7SZZf40hjdYFTMQTSxX/H60w3byJL0 ULfy0sBAht/6rlLLmhwpJp+H8BNI1g728/b2WAqnOooB8vMe0Fw75QF6Iv7+9PTiuo hs/EhavNse/oMSXZulx2Zsh3TKrPAmYtIJ307mQke7c9M8IrT9Zp5O2aaqVccZc0kW Pz1k0XUmPKjQubb0Kal7lyKcfRTO8PCRP1vKspz1HE95h1sVbZiuULPpLEpz5oBImY c9+eFPZjQC4AEm1oyRst+7npPYVSiTXXzIqG8AcPmXhw5ZG3qwQN2W44zICEyPLgM0 u1F+sW6HB294Q== Received: by paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6F60B5C0ACF; Sat, 18 Feb 2023 11:34:38 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2023 11:34:38 -0800 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Zqiang Cc: dave@stgolabs.net, josh@joshtriplett.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] locktorture: Add raw_spinlock* torture tests for PREEMPT_RT kernels Message-ID: <20230218193438.GE2948950@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1> Reply-To: paulmck@kernel.org References: <20230215061035.1534950-1-qiang1.zhang@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230215061035.1534950-1-qiang1.zhang@intel.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 02:10:35PM +0800, Zqiang wrote: > For PREEMPT_RT kernel, the spin_lock, spin_lock_irq will converted > to sleepable rt_spin_lock and the interrupt related suffix for > spin_lock/unlock(_irq, irqsave/irqrestore) do not affect CPU's > interrupt state. this commit therefore add raw_spin_lock torture > tests, this is a strict spin lock implementation in RT kernels. > > Signed-off-by: Zqiang A nice addition! Is this something you will be testing regularly? If not, should there be additional locktorture scenarios, perhaps prefixed by "RT-" to hint that they are not normally available? Or did you have some other plan for making use of these? Thanx, Paul > --- > kernel/locking/locktorture.c | 58 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 58 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c > index 9425aff08936..521197366f27 100644 > --- a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c > +++ b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c > @@ -257,6 +257,61 @@ static struct lock_torture_ops spin_lock_irq_ops = { > .name = "spin_lock_irq" > }; > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT > +static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(torture_raw_spinlock); > + > +static int torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock(int tid __maybe_unused) > +__acquires(torture_raw_spinlock) > +{ > + raw_spin_lock(&torture_raw_spinlock); > + return 0; > +} > + > +static void torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock(int tid __maybe_unused) > +__releases(torture_raw_spinlock) > +{ > + raw_spin_unlock(&torture_raw_spinlock); > +} > + > +static struct lock_torture_ops raw_spin_lock_ops = { > + .writelock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock, > + .write_delay = torture_spin_lock_write_delay, > + .task_boost = torture_rt_boost, > + .writeunlock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock, > + .readlock = NULL, > + .read_delay = NULL, > + .readunlock = NULL, > + .name = "raw_spin_lock" > +}; > + > +static int torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock_irq(int tid __maybe_unused) > +__acquires(torture_raw_spinlock) > +{ > + unsigned long flags; > + > + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&torture_raw_spinlock, flags); > + cxt.cur_ops->flags = flags; > + return 0; > +} > + > +static void torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock_irq(int tid __maybe_unused) > +__releases(torture_raw_spinlock) > +{ > + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&torture_raw_spinlock, cxt.cur_ops->flags); > +} > + > +static struct lock_torture_ops raw_spin_lock_irq_ops = { > + .writelock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_lock_irq, > + .write_delay = torture_spin_lock_write_delay, > + .task_boost = torture_rt_boost, > + .writeunlock = torture_raw_spin_lock_write_unlock_irq, > + .readlock = NULL, > + .read_delay = NULL, > + .readunlock = NULL, > + .name = "raw_spin_lock_irq" > +}; > +#endif > + > static DEFINE_RWLOCK(torture_rwlock); > > static int torture_rwlock_write_lock(int tid __maybe_unused) > @@ -1017,6 +1072,9 @@ static int __init lock_torture_init(void) > static struct lock_torture_ops *torture_ops[] = { > &lock_busted_ops, > &spin_lock_ops, &spin_lock_irq_ops, > +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT > + &raw_spin_lock_ops, &raw_spin_lock_irq_ops, > +#endif > &rw_lock_ops, &rw_lock_irq_ops, > &mutex_lock_ops, > &ww_mutex_lock_ops, > -- > 2.25.1 >