On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 09:24:19PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 09:18:26PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 10:47:41AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > Lots of things take locks, due to a wee bug, rcu_lockdep didn't notice
> > > that the locking tracepoints were using RCU.
> > >
> > > Push rcu_idle_{enter,exit}() as deep as possible into the idle paths,
> > > this also resolves a lot of _rcuidle()/RCU_NONIDLE() usage.
> > >
> > > Specifically, sched_clock_idle_wakeup_event() will use ktime which
> > > will use seqlocks which will tickle lockdep, and
> > > stop_critical_timings() uses lock.
> >
> > I was wondering if those tracepoints should just use _rcuidle variant of the
> > trace call. But that's a terrible idea considering that would add unwanted
> > overhead I think.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <j...@joelfernandes.org>
>
> BTW, if tracepoint is converted to use RCU-trace flavor, then these kinds of
> issues go away, no? That RCU flavor is always watching.
All trace_*_rcuidle() and RCU_NONIDLE() usage is a bug IMO.
Ideally RCU-trace goes away too.
