[PATCH v4 12/17] watchdog/hardlockup: Have the perf hardlockup use __weak functions more cleanly

Petr Mladek pmladek at suse.com
Fri May 12 21:55:24 AEST 2023

On Thu 2023-05-04 15:13:44, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> The fact that there watchdog_hardlockup_enable(),
> watchdog_hardlockup_disable(), and watchdog_hardlockup_probe() are
> declared __weak means that the configured hardlockup detector can
> define non-weak versions of those functions if it needs to. Instead of
> doing this, the perf hardlockup detector hooked itself into the
> default __weak implementation, which was a bit awkward. Clean this up.
> >From comments, it looks as if the original design was done because the
> __weak function were expected to implemented by the architecture and
> not by the configured hardlockup detector. This got awkward when we
> tried to add the buddy lockup detector which was not arch-specific but
> wanted to hook into those same functions.
> This is not expected to have any functional impact.
> Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders at chromium.org>

I like this change:

Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek at suse.com>

See a comment below.

> --- a/kernel/watchdog_perf.c
> +++ b/kernel/watchdog_perf.c
> @@ -147,12 +151,16 @@ void hardlockup_detector_perf_enable(void)
>  }
>  /**
> - * hardlockup_detector_perf_disable - Disable the local event
> + * watchdog_hardlockup_disable - Disable the local event
> + *
> + * @cpu: The CPU to enable hard lockup on.
>   */
> -void hardlockup_detector_perf_disable(void)
> +void watchdog_hardlockup_disable(unsigned int cpu)
>  {
>  	struct perf_event *event = this_cpu_read(watchdog_ev);
> +	WARN_ON_ONCE(cpu != smp_processor_id());
> +

It makes sense. But it just shows how the code is weird.
@cpu is passed as a parameter and the code expects that it is
running on the given CPU.

It seems that @cpu is passed as a parameter because this is
called from:

  + [CPUHP_AP_WATCHDOG_ONLINE].teardown.single()
    + lockup_detector_offline_cpu()
      + watchdog_disable()

and the CPU hotplug API passes @cpu parameter.

IMHO, the clean solution would be to use per_cpu*() instead
of this_cpu*() API everywhere in this code path.

But it is yet another cleanup. It seems to be out-of-scope of
this patchset.

>  	if (event) {
>  		perf_event_disable(event);
>  		this_cpu_write(watchdog_ev, NULL);

Best Regards,

More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list