From: Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadh...@kernel.org>

rcu_task_enter() and rcu_task_exit() are not called on NMI
entry and exit. So, Tasks-RCU-Rude grace period wait is required to
ensure that NMI handlers have entered/exited into Tasks-RCU eqs.
For architectures which do not require Tasks-RCU-Rude (as the code
sections where RCU is not watching are marked as noinstr), when
those architectures switch to not using Tasks-RCU-Rude, NMI handlers
task exit to eqs will need to be handled correctly for Tasks-RCU holdout
tasks running on nohz_full CPUs. As it is safe to call these two
functions from NMI context, remove the in_nmi() check. This ensures
that RCU-tasks entry/exit is marked correctly for NMI handlers.
With this check removed, all callers of ct_kernel_exit_state() and
ct_kernel_enter_state() now also call rcu_task_exit() and
rcu_task_enter() respectively. So, fold rcu_task_exit() and
rcu_task_entry() calls into ct_kernel_exit_state() and
ct_kernel_enter_state().

Reported-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frede...@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frede...@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: "Paul E. McKenney" <paul...@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul...@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadh...@kernel.org>
---
 kernel/context_tracking.c | 11 +++--------
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/context_tracking.c b/kernel/context_tracking.c
index 938c48952d26..85ced563af23 100644
--- a/kernel/context_tracking.c
+++ b/kernel/context_tracking.c
@@ -91,6 +91,7 @@ static noinstr void ct_kernel_exit_state(int offset)
        seq = ct_state_inc(offset);
        // RCU is no longer watching.  Better be in extended quiescent state!
        WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RCU_EQS_DEBUG) && (seq & 
CT_RCU_WATCHING));
+       rcu_task_exit();
 }
 
 /*
@@ -102,6 +103,8 @@ static noinstr void ct_kernel_enter_state(int offset)
 {
        int seq;
 
+       rcu_task_enter();
+
        /*
         * CPUs seeing atomic_add_return() must see prior idle sojourns,
         * and we also must force ordering with the next RCU read-side
@@ -149,7 +152,6 @@ static void noinstr ct_kernel_exit(bool user, int offset)
        // RCU is watching here ...
        ct_kernel_exit_state(offset);
        // ... but is no longer watching here.
-       rcu_task_exit();
 }
 
 /*
@@ -173,7 +175,6 @@ static void noinstr ct_kernel_enter(bool user, int offset)
                ct->nesting++;
                return;
        }
-       rcu_task_enter();
        // RCU is not watching here ...
        ct_kernel_enter_state(offset);
        // ... but is watching here.
@@ -238,9 +239,6 @@ void noinstr ct_nmi_exit(void)
        // RCU is watching here ...
        ct_kernel_exit_state(CT_RCU_WATCHING);
        // ... but is no longer watching here.
-
-       if (!in_nmi())
-               rcu_task_exit();
 }
 
 /**
@@ -273,9 +271,6 @@ void noinstr ct_nmi_enter(void)
         */
        if (!rcu_is_watching_curr_cpu()) {
 
-               if (!in_nmi())
-                       rcu_task_enter();
-
                // RCU is not watching here ...
                ct_kernel_enter_state(CT_RCU_WATCHING);
                // ... but is watching here.
-- 
2.40.1


Reply via email to