On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 08:20:45PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2019-06-28 14:07:27 [-0400], Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 07:45:45PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > > On 2019-06-28 10:30:11 [-0700], Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > > I believe the .blocked field remains set even though we are not any
> > > > > more in a
> > > > > reader section because of deferred processing of the blocked lists
> > > > > that you
> > > > > mentioned yesterday.
> > > >
> > > > That can indeed happen. However, in current -rcu, that would mean
> > > > that .deferred_qs is also set, which (if in_irq()) would prevent
> > > > the raise_softirq_irqsoff() from being invoked. Which was why I was
> > > > asking the questions about whether in_irq() returns true within threaded
> > > > interrupts yesterday. If it does, I need to find if there is some way
> > > > of determining whether rcu_read_unlock_special() is being called from
> > > > a threaded interrupt in order to suppress the call to raise_softirq()
> > > > in that case.
> > >
> > > Please not that:
> > > | void irq_exit(void)
> > > | {
> > > |…
> > > in_irq() returns true
> > > | preempt_count_sub(HARDIRQ_OFFSET);
> > > in_irq() returns false
> > > | if (!in_interrupt() && local_softirq_pending())
> > > | invoke_softirq();
> > >
> > > -> invoke_softirq() does
> > > | if (!force_irqthreads) {
> > > | __do_softirq();
> > > | } else {
> > > | wakeup_softirqd();
> > > | }
> > >
> >
> > In my traces which I shared previous email, the wakeup_softirqd() gets
> > called.
> >
> > I thought force_irqthreads value is decided at boot time, so I got lost a
> > bit
> > with your comment.
>
> It does. I just wanted point out that in this case
> rcu_unlock() / rcu_read_unlock_special() won't see in_irq() true.
Paul, Sebastian, This commit breaks kvm.sh for me on both my machines. I have
to revert it to make things work otherwise the test just runs for 10 seconds
or so and dies.
"rcutorture: Tweak kvm options"
This reverts commit a6fda6dab93c2c06ef4b8cb4b9258df6674d2438.
Any thoughts or debug ideas? I am running v4.19.37
thanks,
- Joel
