Re: [PATCH RT v2 1/3] rcu: Acquire RCU lock when disabling BHs
From: Scott Wood
Date: Mon Aug 26 2019 - 19:21:51 EST
On Mon, 2019-08-26 at 17:59 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2019-08-23 14:46:39 [-0500], Scott Wood wrote:
> > > > Before consolidation, RT mapped rcu_read_lock_bh_held() to
> > > > rcu_read_lock_bh() and called rcu_read_lock() from
> > > > rcu_read_lock_bh(). This
> > > > somehow got lost when rebasing on top of 5.0.
> > >
> > > so now rcu_read_lock_bh_held() is untouched and in_softirq() reports
> > > 1.
> > > So the problem is that we never hold RCU but report 1 like we do?
> > Yes.
> I understand the part where "rcu_read_lock() becomes part of
> local_bh_disable()". But why do you modify rcu_read_lock_bh_held() and
> rcu_read_lock_bh()? Couldn't they remain as-is?
Yes, it looks like they can. I recall having problems with
rcu_read_lock_bh_held() in an earlier version which is what prompted the
change, but looking back I don't see what the problem was.