From 6aa7de059173a986114ac43b8f50b297a86f09a8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Mark Rutland Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 14:07:29 -0700 Subject: locking/atomics: COCCINELLE/treewide: Convert trivial ACCESS_ONCE() patterns to READ_ONCE()/WRITE_ONCE() Please do not apply this to mainline directly, instead please re-run the coccinelle script shown below and apply its output. For several reasons, it is desirable to use {READ,WRITE}_ONCE() in preference to ACCESS_ONCE(), and new code is expected to use one of the former. So far, there's been no reason to change most existing uses of ACCESS_ONCE(), as these aren't harmful, and changing them results in churn. However, for some features, the read/write distinction is critical to correct operation. To distinguish these cases, separate read/write accessors must be used. This patch migrates (most) remaining ACCESS_ONCE() instances to {READ,WRITE}_ONCE(), using the following coccinelle script: ---- // Convert trivial ACCESS_ONCE() uses to equivalent READ_ONCE() and // WRITE_ONCE() // $ make coccicheck COCCI=/home/mark/once.cocci SPFLAGS="--include-headers" MODE=patch virtual patch @ depends on patch @ expression E1, E2; @@ - ACCESS_ONCE(E1) = E2 + WRITE_ONCE(E1, E2) @ depends on patch @ expression E; @@ - ACCESS_ONCE(E) + READ_ONCE(E) ---- Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner Cc: davem@davemloft.net Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org Cc: mpe@ellerman.id.au Cc: shuah@kernel.org Cc: snitzer@redhat.com Cc: thor.thayer@linux.intel.com Cc: tj@kernel.org Cc: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk Cc: will.deacon@arm.com Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1508792849-3115-19-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- kernel/trace/trace_stack.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'kernel/trace/trace_stack.c') diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c b/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c index 49cb41412eec..780262210c9a 100644 --- a/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ check_stack(unsigned long ip, unsigned long *stack) { unsigned long this_size, flags; unsigned long *p, *top, *start; static int tracer_frame; - int frame_size = ACCESS_ONCE(tracer_frame); + int frame_size = READ_ONCE(tracer_frame); int i, x; this_size = ((unsigned long)stack) & (THREAD_SIZE-1); -- cgit v1.3-14-g43fede From b00d607bb188e187c7b60074d2fa91a6f1985029 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Steven Rostedt (VMware)" Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 04:41:51 -0500 Subject: tracing: Have stack trace not record if RCU is not watching The stack tracer records a stack dump whenever it sees a stack usage that is more than what it ever saw before. This can happen at any function that is being traced. If it happens when the CPU is going idle (or other strange locations), RCU may not be watching, and in this case, the recording of the stack trace will trigger a warning. There's been lots of efforts to make hacks to allow stack tracing to proceed even if RCU is not watching, but this only causes more issues to appear. Simply do not trace a stack if RCU is not watching. It probably isn't a bad stack anyway. Acked-by: "Paul E. McKenney" Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) --- kernel/trace/trace_stack.c | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) (limited to 'kernel/trace/trace_stack.c') diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c b/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c index 734accc02418..3c7bfc4bf5e9 100644 --- a/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c @@ -209,6 +209,10 @@ stack_trace_call(unsigned long ip, unsigned long parent_ip, if (__this_cpu_read(disable_stack_tracer) != 1) goto out; + /* If rcu is not watching, then save stack trace can fail */ + if (!rcu_is_watching()) + goto out; + ip += MCOUNT_INSN_SIZE; check_stack(ip, &stack); -- cgit v1.3-14-g43fede