[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH RFC v2 03/15] rcu-tasks: Hold trampoline nesting across irq-exit preemption in trampoline text
- To: Josef Bacik <josef@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2026 15:13:23 +0200
- Authentication-results: eu.smtp.expurgate.cloud; dkim=pass header.s=k20260515 header.d=kernel.org header.i="@kernel.org" header.h="Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To"
- Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx>, Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@xxxxxxxxxx>, Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@xxxxxxxxxx>, Boqun Feng <boqun@xxxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxx>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@xxxxxxxxxx>, x86@xxxxxxxxxx, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx>, Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx>, Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@xxxxxxxxxx>, Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxx>, Josh Triplett <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@xxxxxxxxx>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@xxxxxxxxx>, Zqiang <qiang.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>, Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>, Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ihor Solodrai <ihor.solodrai@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, rcu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-trace-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, bpf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Tue, 15 Sep 2026 13:13:47 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
Le Fri, Sep 11, 2026 at 02:08:41PM +0000, Josef Bacik a écrit :
> A trampoline's own rcu_tramp_nesting increment and decrement live inside
> the trampoline, so there is a window of a few instructions on entry and
> exit where the count is zero while the CPU is executing trampoline text
> (or text on the way into one, such as a static ftrace stub holding a
> direct-call target). In that window the task has not called out, so it
> can only be preempted from an interrupt, and the interrupted instruction
> pointer identifies where it is.
I haven't read the whole patchset yet but what happens if the count is zero
on trampoline exit but the trampoline isn't finished yet and RCU tasks does a
fully quiescent scan of all tasks during that short window? Isn't that ending
with a too short grace period?
Thanks.
--
Frederic Weisbecker
SUSE Labs
|