mirror of
https://github.com/FEX-Emu/linux.git
synced 2024-12-17 06:17:35 +00:00
rcu: Inform RCU of irq_exit() activity
This is a port to TINY_RCU of Peter Zijlstra's commit #ec433f0c5 The rcu_read_unlock_special() function relies on in_irq() to exclude scheduler activity from interrupt level. This fails because exit_irq() can invoke the scheduler after clearing the preempt_count() bits that in_irq() uses to determine that it is at interrupt level. This situation can result in failures as follows: $task IRQ SoftIRQ rcu_read_lock() /* do stuff */ <preempt> |= UNLOCK_BLOCKED rcu_read_unlock() --t->rcu_read_lock_nesting irq_enter(); /* do stuff, don't use RCU */ irq_exit(); sub_preempt_count(IRQ_EXIT_OFFSET); invoke_softirq() ttwu(); spin_lock_irq(&pi->lock) rcu_read_lock(); /* do stuff */ rcu_read_unlock(); rcu_read_unlock_special() rcu_report_exp_rnp() ttwu() spin_lock_irq(&pi->lock) /* deadlock */ rcu_read_unlock_special(t); This can be triggered 'easily' because invoke_softirq() immediately does a ttwu() of ksoftirqd/# instead of doing the in-place softirq stuff first, but even without that the above happens. Cure this by also excluding softirqs from the rcu_read_unlock_special() handler and ensuring the force_irqthreads ksoftirqd/# wakeup is done from full softirq context. It is also necessary to delay the ->rcu_read_lock_nesting decrement until after rcu_read_unlock_special(). This delay is handled by the commit "Protect __rcu_read_unlock() against scheduler-using irq handlers". Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
768dfffdff
commit
8762705ad4
@ -570,7 +570,7 @@ static noinline void rcu_read_unlock_special(struct task_struct *t)
|
||||
rcu_preempt_cpu_qs();
|
||||
|
||||
/* Hardware IRQ handlers cannot block. */
|
||||
if (in_irq()) {
|
||||
if (in_irq() || in_serving_softirq()) {
|
||||
local_irq_restore(flags);
|
||||
return;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user