From: Sebastien Dugue <sebastien.dugue@bull•net>
To: michael@ellerman•id.au
Cc: tinytim@us•ibm.com, linux-rt-users@vger•kernel.org,
jean-pierre.dion@bull•net, rostedt@goodmis•org,
linux-kernel@vger•kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs•org,
paulus@samba•org, gilles.carry@ext•bull.net, tglx@linutronix•de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc - Initialize the irq radix tree earlier
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:14:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080731161430.5de73ef8@bull.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1217511566.19050.26.camel@localhost>
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 23:39:26 +1000 Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman•id.au=
> wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-07-31 at 15:26 +0200, Sebastien Dugue wrote:
> > On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 23:01:39 +1000 Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman•i=
d.au> wrote:
> >=20
> > > On Thu, 2008-07-31 at 22:58 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2008-07-31 at 14:00 +0200, Sebastien Dugue wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 21:40:56 +1000 Michael Ellerman <michael@elle=
rman.id.au> wrote:
> > > > > >=20
> > > > > > This boot ordering stuff is pretty hairy, so I might have missed
> > > > > > something, but this is how the code is ordered AFAICT:
> > > > > > =EF=BB=BF
> > > > > > start_kernel()
> > > > > > init_IRQ()
> > > > > > ...
> > > > > > local_irq_enable()
> > > > > > ...
> > > > > > rest_init()
> > > > > > kernel_thread()
> > > > > > kernel_init()
> > > > > > smp_prepare_cpus()
> > > > > > smp_xics_probe() (via smp_ops->probe())
> > > > > >=20
> > > > > >=20
> > > > > > What's stopping us from taking an irq between local_irq_enable(=
) and
> > > > > > smp_xics_probe() ? Is it just that no one's request_irq()'ed t=
hem yet?
> > > > >=20
> > > > > It's hairy, I agree, but as you've mentioned no one has done a =
request_irq()
> > > > > at that point. The first one to do it is smp_xics_probe() for the=
IPI.
> > > >=20
> > > > Hmm, I don't think that's strong enough. I can trivially cause irqs=
to
> > > > fire during a kexec reboot just by mashing the keyboard.
> > > >=20
> > > > And during a kdump boot all sorts of stuff could be firing. Even du=
ring
> > > > a clean boot, from firmware, I don't think we can guarantee that
> > > > nothing's going to fire.
> > > >=20
> > > > .. after a bit of testing ..
> > > >=20
> > > > It seems it actually works (sort of).=20
> > > >=20
> > > > xics_remap_irq() calls irq_radix_revmap_lookup(), which calls:
> > > >=20
> > > > ptr =3D radix_tree_lookup(&host->revmap_data.tree, hwirq);
> > > >=20
> > > > And because =EF=BB=BFhost->revmap_data.tree was zalloc'ed we trip o=
n the first
> > > > check here:
> > >=20
> > > @#$% ctrl-enter =3D=3D send!
> > >=20
> > > Continuing ...
> > >=20
> > > void *radix_tree_lookup(struct radix_tree_root *root, unsigned long i=
ndex)
> > > {
> > > unsigned int height, shift;
> > > struct radix_tree_node *node, **slot;
> > >=20
> > > node =3D rcu_dereference(root->rnode);
> > > if (node =3D=3D NULL)
> > > return NULL;
> > >=20
> > > Which means =EF=BB=BFirq_radix_revmap_lookup() will return NO_IRQ, wh=
ich is cool.
> >=20
> > Which is what I intended so that as long as no IRQ is registered we
> > return NO_IRQ.
> >=20
> > >=20
> > >=20
> > > So I think it can fly, as long as we're happy that we can't reverse m=
ap
> > > anything until smp_xics_probe() - and I think that's true, as any irq=
we
> > > take will be invalid.
> >=20
> > That's true as no IRQs are registered before smp_xics_probe() and for=
any
> > interrupt we might get before that, irq_radix_revmap_lookup() will retu=
rn
> > NO_IRQ.
>=20
> Cool, we agree :)=20
>=20
> My only worry is that we might be relying on on the particular radix
> tree implementation a bit too much.
Well maybe we could revert back to testing a flag just like we
do for host->revmap_data.tree.gfp_mask !=3D 0. Dunno.
> Is it documented somewhere that
> the /very/ first check is for =EF=BB=BFroot->rnode !=3D NULL, and the res=
t of the
> root may be unintialised?
Not in anything I could read except in looking at the code.
>=20
> And I think it needs a big fat comment in the irq code saying that it's
> safe because revmap_data is zalloc'ed, and that means the radix lookup
> will fail (safely).
Yep, right. Will advertise this properly for the next round if this
remains the prefered solution.
Thanks,
Sebastien.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-31 14:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-31 9:40 [PATCH 0/3] powerpc - Make the irq reverse mapping tree lockless Sebastien Dugue
2008-07-31 9:40 ` [PATCH] powerpc - Initialize the irq radix tree earlier Sebastien Dugue
2008-07-31 11:40 ` Michael Ellerman
2008-07-31 12:00 ` Sebastien Dugue
2008-07-31 12:10 ` Sebastien Dugue
2008-07-31 12:58 ` Michael Ellerman
2008-07-31 13:01 ` Michael Ellerman
2008-07-31 13:26 ` Sebastien Dugue
2008-07-31 13:39 ` Michael Ellerman
2008-07-31 14:14 ` Sebastien Dugue [this message]
2008-07-31 9:40 ` [PATCH] powerpc - Separate the irq radix tree insertion and lookup Sebastien Dugue
2008-07-31 9:40 ` [PATCH] powerpc - Make the irq reverse mapping radix tree lockless Sebastien Dugue
2008-07-31 10:12 ` [PATCH 0/3] powerpc - Make the irq reverse mapping " Sebastien Dugue
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080731161430.5de73ef8@bull.net \
--to=sebastien.dugue@bull$(echo .)net \
--cc=gilles.carry@ext$(echo .)bull.net \
--cc=jean-pierre.dion@bull$(echo .)net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs$(echo .)org \
--cc=michael@ellerman$(echo .)id.au \
--cc=paulus@samba$(echo .)org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis$(echo .)org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix$(echo .)de \
--cc=tinytim@us$(echo .)ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox