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:   Fri, 28 Jul 2023 17:07:18 +0200
From:   Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To:     Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Marco Elver <elver@google.com>, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
        Clark Williams <williams@redhat.com>,
        ThomasGleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: 'perf test sigtrap' failing on PREEMPT_RT_FULL
Message-ID: <20230728150718.8odZX-jD@linutronix.de>
References: <ZMAtZ2t43GXoF6tM@kernel.org>
 <e368f2c848d77fbc8d259f44e2055fe469c219cf.camel@gmx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In-Reply-To: <e368f2c848d77fbc8d259f44e2055fe469c219cf.camel@gmx.de>
Precedence: bulk

On 2023-07-26 08:10:45 [+0200], Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > [=C2=A0=C2=A0 52.848925] BUG: scheduling while atomic: perf/6549/0x0000=
0002
>=20
> Had bf9ad37dc8a not been reverted due to insufficient beauty, you could
> trivially make the sigtrap test a happy camper (wart tested in tip-rt).

Thank you for the pointer Mike.

I guess we need this preempt_disable_notrace() in perf_pending_task()
due to context accounting in get_recursion_context(). Would a
migrate_disable() be sufficient or could we send the signal outside of
the preempt-disabled block?

This is also used in perf_pending_irq() and on PREEMPT_RT this is
invoked from softirq context which is preemptible.

Sebastian