On Wed, 10 Feb 2021, Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) wrote:
On Wed, 10 Feb 2021, Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) wrote:
On Wed, 10 Feb 2021, Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) wrote:
> > There is no warning from m68k builds. That's because > > arch_irqs_disabled() returns true when the IPL is non-zero. > > So for m68k, the case is arch_irqs_disabled() is true, but > interrupts can still come? > > Then it seems it is very confusing. If prioritized interrupts > can still come while arch_irqs_disabled() is true,
Yes, on m68k CPUs, an IRQ having a priority level higher than the present priority mask will get serviced.
Non-Maskable Interrupt (NMI) is not subject to this rule and gets serviced regardless.
> how could spin_lock_irqsave() block the prioritized interrupts?
It raises the the mask level to 7. Again, please see arch/m68k/include/asm/irqflags.h
Hi Finn, Thanks for your explanation again.
TBH, that is why m68k is so confusing. irqs_disabled() on m68k should just reflect the status of all interrupts have been disabled except NMI.
irqs_disabled() should be consistent with the calling of APIs such as local_irq_disable, local_irq_save, spin_lock_irqsave etc.
When irqs_disabled() returns true, we cannot infer that arch_local_irq_disable() was called. But I have not yet found driver code or core kernel code attempting that inference.
> Isn't arch_irqs_disabled() a status reflection of irq disable > API? >
Why not?
If so, arch_irqs_disabled() should mean all interrupts have been masked except NMI as NMI is unmaskable.
Can you support that claim with a reference to core kernel code or documentation? (If some arch code agrees with you, that's neither here nor there.)
I think those links I share you have supported this. Just you don't believe :-)
Your links show that the distinction between fast and slow handlers was removed. Your links don't support your claim that "arch_irqs_disabled() should mean all interrupts have been masked". Where is the code that makes that inference? Where is the documentation that supports your claim?
(1) https://lwn.net/Articles/380931/ Looking at all these worries, one might well wonder if a system which *disabled interrupts for all handlers* would function well at all. So it is interesting to note one thing: any system which has the lockdep locking checker enabled has been running all handlers that way for some years now. Many developers and testers run lockdep-enabled kernels, and they are available for some of the more adventurous distributions (Rawhide, for example) as well. So we have quite a bit of test coverage for this mode of operation already.
(2) https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/ ?id=b738a50a
"We run all handlers *with interrupts disabled* and expect them not to enable them. Warn when we catch one who does."
(3) https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/ ?id=e58aa3d2d0cc genirq: Run irq handlers *with interrupts disabled*
Running interrupt handlers with interrupts enabled can cause stack overflows. That has been observed with multiqueue NICs delivering all their interrupts to a single core. We might band aid that somehow by checking the interrupt stacks, but the real safe fix is to *run the irq handlers with interrupts disabled*.
All these documents say we are running irq handler with interrupts disabled. but it seems you think high-prio interrupts don't belong to "interrupts" in those documents :-)
that is why we can't get agreement. I think "interrupts" mean all except NMI in these documents, but you insist high-prio IRQ is an exception.
Are all interrupts (including NMI) masked whenever arch_irqs_disabled() returns true on your platforms?
On my platform, once irqs_disabled() is true, all interrupts are masked except NMI. NMI just ignore spin_lock_irqsave or local_irq_disable.
On ARM64, we also have high-priority interrupts, but they are running as PESUDO_NMI: https://lwn.net/Articles/755906/
A glance at the ARM GIC specification suggests that your hardware works much like 68000 hardware.
When enabled, a CPU interface takes the highest priority pending interrupt for its connected processor and determines whether the interrupt has sufficient priority for it to signal the interrupt request to the processor. [...]
When the processor acknowledges the interrupt at the CPU interface, the Distributor changes the status of the interrupt from pending to either active, or active and pending. At this point the CPU interface can signal another interrupt to the processor, to preempt interrupts that are active on the processor. If there is no pending interrupt with sufficient priority for signaling to the processor, the interface deasserts the interrupt request signal to the processor.
https://developer.arm.com/documentation/ihi0048/b/
Have you considered that Linux/arm might benefit if it could fully exploit hardware features already available, such as the interrupt priority masking feature in the GIC in existing arm systems?
I guess no:-) there are only two levels: IRQ and NMI. Injecting a high-prio IRQ level between them makes no sense.
To me, arm64's design is quite clear and has no any confusion.
Are you saying that the ARM64 hardware design is confusing because it implements a priority mask, and that's why you had to simplify it with a pseudo-nmi scheme in software?
No, I was not saying this. I think both m68k and arm64 have good hardware design. Just Linux's implementation is running irq-handlers with interrupts disabled. So ARM64's pseudo-nmi is adapted to Linux better.
On m68k, it seems you mean： irq_disabled() is true, but high-priority interrupts can still come; local_irq_disable() can disable high-priority interrupts, and at that time, irq_disabled() is also true.
TBH, this is wrong and confusing on m68k.
Like you, I was surprised when I learned about it. But that doesn't mean it's wrong. The fact that it works should tell you something.
The fact is that m68k lets arch_irq_disabled() return true to pretend all IRQs are disabled while high-priority IRQ is still open, thus "pass" all sanitizing check in genirq and kernel core.
The fact is that m68k has arch_irq_disabled() return false when all IRQs are enabled. So there is no bug.
But it has arch_irq_disabled() return true while some interrupts(not NMI) are still open.
Things could always be made simpler. But discarding features isn't necessarily an improvement.
This feature could be used by calling local_irq_enable_in_hardirq() in those IRQ handlers who hope high-priority interrupts to preempt it for a while.
So, if one handler is sensitive to interrupt latency, all other handlers should be modified? I don't think that's workable.
I think we just enable preempt_rt or force threaded_irq, and then improve the priority of the irq thread who is sensitive to latency. No need to touch all threads.
I also understand your point, we let one high-prio interrupt preempt low priority interrupt, then we don't need to change the whole system. But I think Linux prefers the method of threaded_irq or preempt_rt for this kind of problems.
In anycase, what you're describing is a completely different nested interrupt scheme that would defeat the priority level mechanism that the hardware provides us with.
Yes. Indeed.
It shouldn't hide somewhere and make confusion.
The problem is hiding so well that no-one has found it! I say it doesn't exist.
Long long ago(before 2.6.38), we had a kernel supporting IRQF_DISABLED and nested interrupts were widely supported, but system also ran well in most cases. That means nested interrupts don't really matter in most cases. That is why m68k is also running well even though it is still nesting.
On the other hand, those who care about realtime should use threaded IRQ and let IRQ threads preempt each other.
Yes. And those threads also have priority levels.
Finn, I am not a m68k guy, would you help check if this could activate a warning on m68k. maybe we can discuss this question in genirq maillist from this warning if you are happy. Thanks very much.
diff --git a/include/linux/hardirq.h b/include/linux/hardirq.h index 7c9d6a2d7e90..b8ca27555c76 100644 --- a/include/linux/hardirq.h +++ b/include/linux/hardirq.h @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ static __always_inline void rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(void) */ #define __irq_enter() \ do { \
WARN_ONCE(in_hardirq() && irqs_disabled(), "nestedinterrupts\n"); \ preempt_count_add(HARDIRQ_OFFSET); \ lockdep_hardirq_enter(); \ account_hardirq_enter(current); \ @@ -44,6 +45,7 @@ static __always_inline void rcu_irq_enter_check_tick(void) */ #define __irq_enter_raw() \ do { \
WARN_ONCE(in_hardirq() && irqs_disabled(), "nestedinterrupts\n"); \ preempt_count_add(HARDIRQ_OFFSET); \ lockdep_hardirq_enter(); \ } while (0)
I am not a m68k guy, here I can show you some code in cortex-m, which supports full interrupt priority preemption in hardware, but its arch code just disables it to satisfy Linux:
arch/arm/kernel/entry-header.S
.macro v7m_exception_entry ...
@ Linux expects to have irqs off. Do it here before taking stack space cpsid i
arch/arm/kernel/entry-v7m.S
__irq_entry: v7m_exception_entry
@ @ Invoke the IRQ handler @ ... @ routine called with r0 = irq number, r1 = struct pt_regs * bl nvic_handle_irq
pop {lr}
Another example in arch/arc/kernel/entry-arcv2.S:
ENTRY(handle_interrupt)
INTERRUPT_PROLOGUE
# irq control APIs local_irq_save/restore/disable/enable fiddle with # global interrupt enable bits in STATUS32 (.IE for 1 prio, .E[] for 2 prio) # However a taken interrupt doesn't clear these bits. Thus irqs_disabled() # query in hard ISR path would return false (since .IE is set) which would # trips genirq interrupt handling asserts. # # So do a "soft" disable of interrutps here. # # Note this disable is only for consistent book-keeping as further interrupts # will be disabled anyways even w/o this. Hardware tracks active interrupts # seperately in AUX_IRQ_ACT.active and will not take new interrupts # unless this one returns (or higher prio becomes pending in 2-prio scheme)
IRQ_DISABLE
; icause is banked: one per priority level ; so a higher prio interrupt taken here won't clobber prev prio icause lr r0, [ICAUSE] mov blink, ret_from_exception
b.d arch_do_IRQ mov r1, sp
Actually in m68k, I also saw its IRQ entry disabled interrupts by ' move #0x2700,%sr /* disable intrs */'
arch/m68k/include/asm/entry.h:
.macro SAVE_ALL_SYS move #0x2700,%sr /* disable intrs */ btst #5,%sp@(2) /* from user? */ bnes 6f /* no, skip */ movel %sp,sw_usp /* save user sp */ ...
.macro SAVE_ALL_INT SAVE_ALL_SYS moveq #-1,%d0 /* not system call entry */ movel %d0,%sp@(PT_OFF_ORIG_D0) .endm
arch/m68k/kernel/entry.S:
/* This is the main interrupt handler for autovector interrupts */
ENTRY(auto_inthandler) SAVE_ALL_INT GET_CURRENT(%d0) | put exception # in d0 bfextu %sp@(PT_OFF_FORMATVEC){#4,#10},%d0 subw #VEC_SPUR,%d0
movel %sp,%sp@- movel %d0,%sp@- | put vector # on stack auto_irqhandler_fixup = . + 2 jsr do_IRQ | process the IRQ addql #8,%sp | pop parameters off stack jra ret_from_exception
So my question is that " move #0x2700,%sr" is actually disabling all interrupts? And is m68k actually running irq handlers with interrupts disabled?
Best Regards Barry
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021, Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) wrote:
Actually in m68k, I also saw its IRQ entry disabled interrupts by ' move #0x2700,%sr /* disable intrs */'
arch/m68k/include/asm/entry.h:
.macro SAVE_ALL_SYS move #0x2700,%sr /* disable intrs */ btst #5,%sp@(2) /* from user? */ bnes 6f /* no, skip */ movel %sp,sw_usp /* save user sp */ ...
.macro SAVE_ALL_INT SAVE_ALL_SYS moveq #-1,%d0 /* not system call entry */ movel %d0,%sp@(PT_OFF_ORIG_D0) .endm
arch/m68k/kernel/entry.S:
/* This is the main interrupt handler for autovector interrupts */
ENTRY(auto_inthandler) SAVE_ALL_INT GET_CURRENT(%d0) | put exception # in d0 bfextu %sp@(PT_OFF_FORMATVEC){#4,#10},%d0 subw #VEC_SPUR,%d0
movel %sp,%sp@- movel %d0,%sp@- | put vector # on stack auto_irqhandler_fixup = . + 2 jsr do_IRQ | process the IRQ addql #8,%sp | pop parameters off stack jra ret_from_exception
So my question is that " move #0x2700,%sr" is actually disabling all interrupts? And is m68k actually running irq handlers with interrupts disabled?
When sonic_interrupt() executes, the IPL is 2 or 3 (since either IRQ may be involved). That is, SR & 0x700 is 0x200 or 0x300. The level 3 interrupt may interrupt execution of the level 2 handler so an irq lock is used to avoid re-entrance.
This patch,
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/sonic.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/sonic.c index d17d1b4f2585..041354647bad 100644 --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/sonic.c +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/sonic.c @@ -355,6 +355,8 @@ static irqreturn_t sonic_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id) */ spin_lock_irqsave(&lp->lock, flags);
+ printk_once(KERN_INFO "%s: %08lx\n", __func__, flags); + status = SONIC_READ(SONIC_ISR) & SONIC_IMR_DEFAULT; if (!status) { spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lp->lock, flags);
produces this output,
[ 3.800000] sonic_interrupt: 00002300
I ran that code in QEMU, but experience shows that Apple hardware works exactly the same. Please do confirm this for yourself, if you still think the code and comments in sonic_interrupt are wrong.
Best Regards Barry
-----Original Message----- From: Finn Thain [mailto:fthain@telegraphics.com.au] Sent: Friday, February 12, 2021 12:57 PM To: Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com Cc: tanxiaofei tanxiaofei@huawei.com; jejb@linux.ibm.com; martin.petersen@oracle.com; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linuxarm@openeuler.org; linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org Subject: RE: Re: [PATCH for-next 00/32] spin lock usage optimization for SCSI drivers
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021, Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) wrote:
Actually in m68k, I also saw its IRQ entry disabled interrupts by ' move #0x2700,%sr /* disable intrs */'
arch/m68k/include/asm/entry.h:
.macro SAVE_ALL_SYS move #0x2700,%sr /* disable intrs */ btst #5,%sp@(2) /* from user? */ bnes 6f /* no, skip */ movel %sp,sw_usp /* save user sp */ ...
.macro SAVE_ALL_INT SAVE_ALL_SYS moveq #-1,%d0 /* not system call entry */ movel %d0,%sp@(PT_OFF_ORIG_D0) .endm
arch/m68k/kernel/entry.S:
/* This is the main interrupt handler for autovector interrupts */
ENTRY(auto_inthandler) SAVE_ALL_INT GET_CURRENT(%d0) | put exception # in d0 bfextu %sp@(PT_OFF_FORMATVEC){#4,#10},%d0 subw #VEC_SPUR,%d0
movel %sp,%sp@- movel %d0,%sp@- | put vector # on stack auto_irqhandler_fixup = . + 2 jsr do_IRQ | process the IRQ addql #8,%sp | pop parameters off stack jra ret_from_exception
So my question is that " move #0x2700,%sr" is actually disabling all interrupts? And is m68k actually running irq handlers with interrupts disabled?
When sonic_interrupt() executes, the IPL is 2 or 3 (since either IRQ may be involved). That is, SR & 0x700 is 0x200 or 0x300. The level 3 interrupt may interrupt execution of the level 2 handler so an irq lock is used to avoid re-entrance.
This patch,
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/sonic.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/sonic.c index d17d1b4f2585..041354647bad 100644 --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/sonic.c +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/sonic.c @@ -355,6 +355,8 @@ static irqreturn_t sonic_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id) */ spin_lock_irqsave(&lp->lock, flags);
printk_once(KERN_INFO "%s: %08lx\n", __func__, flags);status = SONIC_READ(SONIC_ISR) & SONIC_IMR_DEFAULT; if (!status) { spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lp->lock, flags);produces this output,
[ 3.800000] sonic_interrupt: 00002300
I actually hope you can directly read the register rather than reading a flag which might be a software one not from register.
I ran that code in QEMU, but experience shows that Apple hardware works exactly the same. Please do confirm this for yourself, if you still think the code and comments in sonic_interrupt are wrong.
Best Regards Barry
Thanks Barry
On Fri, 12 Feb 2021, Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Finn Thain [mailto:fthain@telegraphics.com.au] Sent: Friday, February 12, 2021 12:57 PM To: Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com Cc: tanxiaofei tanxiaofei@huawei.com; jejb@linux.ibm.com; martin.petersen@oracle.com; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linuxarm@openeuler.org; linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org Subject: RE: Re: [PATCH for-next 00/32] spin lock usage optimization for SCSI drivers
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021, Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) wrote:
Actually in m68k, I also saw its IRQ entry disabled interrupts by ' move #0x2700,%sr /* disable intrs */'
arch/m68k/include/asm/entry.h:
.macro SAVE_ALL_SYS move #0x2700,%sr /* disable intrs */ btst #5,%sp@(2) /* from user? */ bnes 6f /* no, skip */ movel %sp,sw_usp /* save user sp */ ...
.macro SAVE_ALL_INT SAVE_ALL_SYS moveq #-1,%d0 /* not system call entry */ movel %d0,%sp@(PT_OFF_ORIG_D0) .endm
arch/m68k/kernel/entry.S:
/* This is the main interrupt handler for autovector interrupts */
ENTRY(auto_inthandler) SAVE_ALL_INT GET_CURRENT(%d0) | put exception # in d0 bfextu %sp@(PT_OFF_FORMATVEC){#4,#10},%d0 subw #VEC_SPUR,%d0
movel %sp,%sp@- movel %d0,%sp@- | put vector # on stack auto_irqhandler_fixup = . + 2 jsr do_IRQ | process the IRQ addql #8,%sp | pop parameters off stack jra ret_from_exception
So my question is that " move #0x2700,%sr" is actually disabling all interrupts? And is m68k actually running irq handlers with interrupts disabled?
When sonic_interrupt() executes, the IPL is 2 or 3 (since either IRQ may be involved). That is, SR & 0x700 is 0x200 or 0x300. The level 3 interrupt may interrupt execution of the level 2 handler so an irq lock is used to avoid re-entrance.
This patch,
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/sonic.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/sonic.c index d17d1b4f2585..041354647bad 100644 --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/sonic.c +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/sonic.c @@ -355,6 +355,8 @@ static irqreturn_t sonic_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id) */ spin_lock_irqsave(&lp->lock, flags);
printk_once(KERN_INFO "%s: %08lx\n", __func__, flags);status = SONIC_READ(SONIC_ISR) & SONIC_IMR_DEFAULT; if (!status) { spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lp->lock, flags);produces this output,
[ 3.800000] sonic_interrupt: 00002300
I actually hope you can directly read the register rather than reading a flag which might be a software one not from register.
Again, the implementation of arch_local_irq_save() may be found in arch/m68k/include/asm/irqflags.h
I ran that code in QEMU, but experience shows that Apple hardware works exactly the same. Please do confirm this for yourself, if you still think the code and comments in sonic_interrupt are wrong.
Best Regards Barry
Thanks Barry
-----Original Message----- From: Finn Thain [mailto:fthain@telegraphics.com.au] Sent: Friday, February 12, 2021 1:09 PM To: Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com Cc: tanxiaofei tanxiaofei@huawei.com; jejb@linux.ibm.com; martin.petersen@oracle.com; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linuxarm@openeuler.org; linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org Subject: RE: Re: [PATCH for-next 00/32] spin lock usage optimization for SCSI drivers
On Fri, 12 Feb 2021, Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Finn Thain [mailto:fthain@telegraphics.com.au] Sent: Friday, February 12, 2021 12:57 PM To: Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com Cc: tanxiaofei tanxiaofei@huawei.com; jejb@linux.ibm.com; martin.petersen@oracle.com; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linuxarm@openeuler.org; linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org Subject: RE: Re: [PATCH for-next 00/32] spin lock usage optimization for
SCSI
drivers
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021, Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) wrote:
Actually in m68k, I also saw its IRQ entry disabled interrupts by ' move #0x2700,%sr /* disable intrs */'
arch/m68k/include/asm/entry.h:
.macro SAVE_ALL_SYS move #0x2700,%sr /* disable intrs */ btst #5,%sp@(2) /* from user? */ bnes 6f /* no, skip */ movel %sp,sw_usp /* save user sp */ ...
.macro SAVE_ALL_INT SAVE_ALL_SYS moveq #-1,%d0 /* not system call entry */ movel %d0,%sp@(PT_OFF_ORIG_D0) .endm
arch/m68k/kernel/entry.S:
/* This is the main interrupt handler for autovector interrupts */
ENTRY(auto_inthandler) SAVE_ALL_INT GET_CURRENT(%d0) | put exception # in d0 bfextu %sp@(PT_OFF_FORMATVEC){#4,#10},%d0 subw #VEC_SPUR,%d0
movel %sp,%sp@- movel %d0,%sp@- | put vector # on stack auto_irqhandler_fixup = . + 2 jsr do_IRQ | process the IRQ addql #8,%sp | pop parameters off stack jra ret_from_exception
So my question is that " move #0x2700,%sr" is actually disabling all interrupts? And is m68k actually running irq handlers with interrupts disabled?
When sonic_interrupt() executes, the IPL is 2 or 3 (since either IRQ may be involved). That is, SR & 0x700 is 0x200 or 0x300. The level 3 interrupt may interrupt execution of the level 2 handler so an irq lock is used to avoid re-entrance.
This patch,
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/sonic.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/sonic.c index d17d1b4f2585..041354647bad 100644 --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/sonic.c +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/sonic.c @@ -355,6 +355,8 @@ static irqreturn_t sonic_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id) */ spin_lock_irqsave(&lp->lock, flags);
printk_once(KERN_INFO "%s: %08lx\n", __func__, flags);status = SONIC_READ(SONIC_ISR) & SONIC_IMR_DEFAULT; if (!status) { spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lp->lock, flags);produces this output,
[ 3.800000] sonic_interrupt: 00002300
I actually hope you can directly read the register rather than reading a flag which might be a software one not from register.
Again, the implementation of arch_local_irq_save() may be found in arch/m68k/include/asm/irqflags.h
Yes. I have read it. Anyway, I started a discussion in genirq with you cc-ed: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/c46ddb954cfe45d9849c911271d7ec23@hisilicon.com/
And thanks very much for all your efforts to help me understand M68k. Let's get this clarified thoroughly in genirq level.
In arm, we also have some special high-priority interrupts which are not NMI but able to preempt normal IRQ. They are managed by arch-extended APIs rather than common APIs.
Neither arch_irqs_disabled() nor local_irq_disable() API can access this kind of interrupts. They are using things specific to ARM like: local_fiq_disable() local_fiq_enable() set_fiq_handler() disable_fiq() enable_fiq() ...
so fiq doesn't bother us anyhow in genirq.
I ran that code in QEMU, but experience shows that Apple hardware works exactly the same. Please do confirm this for yourself, if you still think the code and comments in sonic_interrupt are wrong.
Best Regards Barry
Thanks Barry
-
Finn Thain -
Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)