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;
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, bigeasy@linutronix.de
Cc:     mark.rutland@arm.com, maz@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
        will@kernel.org, chenhuacai@kernel.org, kernel@xen0n.name,
        hca@linux.ibm.com, gor@linux.ibm.com, agordeev@linux.ibm.com,
        borntraeger@linux.ibm.com, svens@linux.ibm.com,
        pbonzini@redhat.com, wanpengli@tencent.com, vkuznets@redhat.com,
        mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com,
        x86@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, jgross@suse.com,
        boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com, daniel.lezcano@linaro.org,
        kys@microsoft.com, haiyangz@microsoft.com, wei.liu@kernel.org,
        decui@microsoft.com, rafael@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
        longman@redhat.com, boqun.feng@gmail.com, pmladek@suse.com,
        senozhatsky@chromium.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
        john.ogness@linutronix.de, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
        vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
        bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de, bristot@redhat.com,
        vschneid@redhat.com, jstultz@google.com, sboyd@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev,
        linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/9] seqlock/latch: Provide
 raw_read_seqcount_latch_retry()
In-Reply-To: <20230508213147.448097252@infradead.org>
References: <20230508211951.901961964@infradead.org>
 <20230508213147.448097252@infradead.org>
Date:   Tue, 09 May 2023 10:13:20 +0200
Message-ID: <871qjp3otb.ffs@tglx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, May 08 2023 at 23:19, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> The read side of seqcount_latch consists of:
>
>   do {
>     seq = raw_read_seqcount_latch(&latch->seq);
>     ...
>   } while (read_seqcount_latch_retry(&latch->seq, seq));
>
> which is asymmetric in the raw_ department, and sure enough,
> read_seqcount_latch_retry() includes (explicit) instrumentation where
> raw_read_seqcount_latch() does not.
>
> This inconsistency becomes a problem when trying to use it from
> noinstr code. As such, fix it by renaming and re-implementing
> raw_read_seqcount_latch_retry() without the instrumentation.
>
> Specifically the instrumentation in question is kcsan_atomic_next(0)
> in do___read_seqcount_retry(). Loosing this annotation is not a
> problem because raw_read_seqcount_latch() does not pass through
> kcsan_atomic_next(KCSAN_SEQLOCK_REGION_MAX).
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>

Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>