Re: [PATCH rcu 2/2] rcu/nocb: Fix rcuog wake-up from offline softirq

[Frederic Weisbecker]

Le Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 10:42:14AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney a écrit :
> From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> After a CPU has set itself offline and before it eventually calls
> rcutree_report_cpu_dead(), there are still opportunities for callbacks
> to be enqueued, for example from an IRQ. When that happens on NOCB, the
> rcuog wake-up is deferred through an IPI to an online CPU in order not
> to call into the scheduler and risk arming the RT-bandwidth after
> hrtimers have been migrated out and disabled.
> 
> But performing a synchronized IPI from an IRQ is buggy as reported in
> the following scenario:
> 
> 	WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 26 at kernel/smp.c:633 smp_call_function_single
> 	Modules linked in: rcutorture torture
> 	CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 26 Comm: migration/1 Not tainted 6.11.0-rc1-00012-g9139f93209d1 #1
> 	Stopper: multi_cpu_stop+0x0/0x320 <- __stop_cpus+0xd0/0x120
> 	RIP: 0010:smp_call_function_single
> 	<IRQ>
> 	swake_up_one_online
> 	__call_rcu_nocb_wake
> 	__call_rcu_common
> 	? rcu_torture_one_read
> 	call_timer_fn
> 	__run_timers
> 	run_timer_softirq
> 	handle_softirqs
> 	irq_exit_rcu
> 	? tick_handle_periodic
> 	sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt
> 	</IRQ>
> 
> The periodic tick must be shutdown when the CPU is offline, just like is
> done for oneshot tick. This must be fixed but this is not enough:
> softirqs can happen on any hardirq tail and reproduce the above scenario.
> 
> Fix this with introducing a special deferred rcuog wake up mode when the
> CPU is offline. This deferred wake up doesn't arm any timer and simply
> wait for rcu_report_cpu_dead() to be called in order to flush any
> pending rcuog wake up.
> 
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@xxxxxxxxx>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202409231644.4c55582d-lkp@xxxxxxxxx
> Fixes: 9139f93209d1 ("rcu/nocb: Fix RT throttling hrtimer armed from offline CPU")
> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx>

You can drop this patch, it has been replaced with another version upstream.

Thanks!