From 79a62f957e0b37c59610a96d018cc341aebb48f4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Lai Jiangshan Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 04:13:22 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] rcu: Warn on allegedly impossible rcu_read_unlock_special() from irq After commit #10f39bb1b2c1 (rcu: protect __rcu_read_unlock() against scheduler-using irq handlers), it is no longer possible to enter the main body of rcu_read_lock_special() from an NMI, interrupt, or softirq handler. In theory, this implies that the check for "in_irq() || in_serving_softirq()" must always fail, so that in theory this check could be removed entirely. In practice, this commit wraps this condition with a WARN_ON_ONCE(). If this warning never triggers, then the condition will be removed entirely. [ paulmck: And one way of triggering the WARN_ON() is if a scheduling clock interrupt occurs in an RCU read-side critical section, setting RCU_READ_UNLOCK_NEED_QS, which is handled by rcu_read_unlock_special(). Updated this commit to return if only that bit was set. ] Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney --- kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h | 8 ++++++-- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h index 752ffaa0d681..fa7a18b62253 100644 --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h @@ -361,10 +361,14 @@ void rcu_read_unlock_special(struct task_struct *t) special = t->rcu_read_unlock_special; if (special & RCU_READ_UNLOCK_NEED_QS) { rcu_preempt_qs(smp_processor_id()); + if (!t->rcu_read_unlock_special) { + local_irq_restore(flags); + return; + } } - /* Hardware IRQ handlers cannot block. */ - if (in_irq() || in_serving_softirq()) { + /* Hardware IRQ handlers cannot block, complain if they get here. */ + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(in_irq() || in_serving_softirq())) { local_irq_restore(flags); return; } -- 2.39.2