From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: "Dmitry Osipenko" <digetx@gmail.com>,
"Michał Mirosław" <mirq-linux@rere.qmqm.pl>,
"Thierry Reding" <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
"Jonathan Hunter" <jonathanh@nvidia.com>,
"Russell King" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
"Catalin Marinas" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
"Will Deacon" <will@kernel.org>, "Guo Ren" <guoren@kernel.org>,
"Greg Ungerer" <gerg@linux-m68k.org>,
"Joshua Thompson" <funaho@jurai.org>,
"Thomas Bogendoerfer" <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>,
"Sebastian Reichel" <sre@kernel.org>,
"Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
"Philipp Zabel" <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>,
"Greentime Hu" <green.hu@gmail.com>,
"Vincent Chen" <deanbo422@gmail.com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
"Helge Deller" <deller@gmx.de>,
"Michael Ellerman" <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
"Benjamin Herrenschmidt" <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
"Paul Mackerras" <paulus@samba.org>,
"Paul Walmsley" <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
"Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
"Albert Ou" <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
"Yoshinori Sato" <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
"Rich Felker" <dalias@libc.org>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"Borislav Petkov" <bp@alien8.de>,
"Dave Hansen" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@kernel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"Boris Ostrovsky" <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
"Juergen Gross" <jgross@suse.com>,
"Stefano Stabellini" <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
"Len Brown" <lenb@kernel.org>,
"Santosh Shilimkar" <ssantosh@kernel.org>,
"Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com>,
"Liam Girdwood" <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
"Mark Brown" <broonie@kernel.org>, "Pavel Machek" <pavel@ucw.cz>,
"Lee Jones" <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Guenter Roeck" <linux@roeck-us.net>,
"Daniel Lezcano" <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
"Andy Shevchenko" <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
"Ulf Hansson" <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
alankao@andestech.com,
"K . C . Kuen-Chern Lin" <kclin@andestech.com>,
"Linux ARM" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-csky@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
"Linux-sh list" <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org,
"ACPI Devel Maling List" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
"Linux PM" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-tegra <linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 05/25] reboot: Warn if restart handler has duplicated priority
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 10:23:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdXW1bCLkJhC1Jnf2rkS1rBnXsMX=4LMVdXDvMV5HOzrLw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0ieTwnBVjW8R_VTdPFH3yr5AwLc+ZEG5N3KrpTH+j8qZw@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 8:14 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 8:04 PM Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 10.12.2021 21:27, Rafael J. Wysocki пишет:
> > > On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 12:34 PM Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> 29.11.2021 03:26, Michał Mirosław пишет:
> > >>> On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 12:06:19AM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> > >>>> 28.11.2021 03:28, Michał Mirosław пишет:
> > >>>>> On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 09:00:41PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> > >>>>>> Add sanity check which ensures that there are no two restart handlers
> > >>>>>> registered with the same priority. Normally it's a direct sign of a
> > >>>>>> problem if two handlers use the same priority.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The patch doesn't ensure the property that there are no duplicated-priority
> > >>>>> entries on the chain.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> It's not the exact point of this patch.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> I'd rather see a atomic_notifier_chain_register_unique() that returns
> > >>>>> -EBUSY or something istead of adding an entry with duplicate priority.
> > >>>>> That way it would need only one list traversal unless you want to
> > >>>>> register the duplicate anyway (then you would call the older
> > >>>>> atomic_notifier_chain_register() after reporting the error).
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The point of this patch is to warn developers about the problem that
> > >>>> needs to be fixed. We already have such troubling drivers in mainline.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> It's not critical to register different handlers with a duplicated
> > >>>> priorities, but such cases really need to be corrected. We shouldn't
> > >>>> break users' machines during transition to the new API, meanwhile
> > >>>> developers should take action of fixing theirs drivers.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> (Or you could return > 0 when a duplicate is registered in
> > >>>>> atomic_notifier_chain_register() if the callers are prepared
> > >>>>> for that. I don't really like this way, though.)
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I had a similar thought at some point before and decided that I'm not in
> > >>>> favor of this approach. It's nicer to have a dedicated function that
> > >>>> verifies the uniqueness, IMO.
> > >>>
> > >>> I don't like the part that it traverses the list second time to check
> > >>> the uniqueness. But actually you could avoid that if
> > >>> notifier_chain_register() would always add equal-priority entries in
> > >>> reverse order:
> > >>>
> > >>> static int notifier_chain_register(struct notifier_block **nl,
> > >>> struct notifier_block *n)
> > >>> {
> > >>> while ((*nl) != NULL) {
> > >>> if (unlikely((*nl) == n)) {
> > >>> WARN(1, "double register detected");
> > >>> return 0;
> > >>> }
> > >>> - if (n->priority > (*nl)->priority)
> > >>> + if (n->priority >= (*nl)->priority)
> > >>> break;
> > >>> nl = &((*nl)->next);
> > >>> }
> > >>> n->next = *nl;
> > >>> rcu_assign_pointer(*nl, n);
> > >>> return 0;
> > >>> }
> > >>>
> > >>> Then the check for uniqueness after adding would be:
> > >>>
> > >>> WARN(nb->next && nb->priority == nb->next->priority);
> > >>
> > >> We can't just change the registration order because invocation order of
> > >> the call chain depends on the registration order
> > >
> > > It doesn't if unique priorities are required and isn't that what you want?
> > >
> > >> and some of current
> > >> users may rely on that order. I'm pretty sure that changing the order
> > >> will have unfortunate consequences.
> > >
> > > Well, the WARN() doesn't help much then.
> > >
> > > Either you can make all of the users register with unique priorities,
> > > and then you can make the registration reject non-unique ones, or you
> > > cannot assume them to be unique.
> >
> > There is no strong requirement for priorities to be unique, the reboot.c
> > code will work properly.
>
> In which case adding the WARN() is not appropriate IMV.
>
> Also I've looked at the existing code and at least in some cases the
> order in which the notifiers run doesn't matter. I'm not sure what
> the purpose of this patch is TBH.
>
> > The potential problem is on the user's side and the warning is intended
> > to aid the user.
>
> Unless somebody has the panic_on_warn mentioned previously set and
> really the user need not understand what the WARN() is about. IOW,
> WARN() helps developers, not users.
Do panic_on_warn and reboot_on_panic play well with having a WARN()
in the reboot notifier handling?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-12-13 9:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-26 18:00 [PATCH v4 00/25] Introduce power-off+restart call chain API Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 01/25] notifier: Remove extern annotation from function prototypes Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 02/25] notifier: Add blocking_notifier_call_chain_is_empty() Dmitry Osipenko
2021-12-10 18:14 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-12-10 18:19 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 03/25] notifier: Add atomic/blocking_notifier_has_unique_priority() Dmitry Osipenko
2021-12-10 18:19 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-12-10 18:52 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-12-10 19:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-12-10 19:33 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-12-10 20:16 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 04/25] reboot: Correct typo in a comment Dmitry Osipenko
2021-12-10 18:21 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 05/25] reboot: Warn if restart handler has duplicated priority Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-28 0:28 ` Michał Mirosław
2021-11-28 21:06 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-29 0:26 ` Michał Mirosław
2021-11-29 11:34 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-12-10 18:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-12-10 19:04 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-12-10 19:14 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-12-10 19:42 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-12-10 19:44 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-12-10 19:49 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-12-13 9:23 ` Geert Uytterhoeven [this message]
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 06/25] reboot: Warn if unregister_restart_handler() fails Dmitry Osipenko
2021-12-10 18:32 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-12-10 18:54 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-12-10 19:08 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-12-10 19:38 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 07/25] reboot: Remove extern annotation from function prototypes Dmitry Osipenko
2021-12-10 18:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-12-10 18:15 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-12-10 18:35 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-12-10 18:56 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 08/25] kernel: Add combined power-off+restart handler call chain API Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-28 0:43 ` Michał Mirosław
2021-11-28 21:04 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-28 21:17 ` Michał Mirosław
2021-11-28 21:53 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-29 0:36 ` Michał Mirosław
2021-11-29 11:52 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 09/25] ARM: Use do_kernel_power_off() Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 10/25] csky: " Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 11/25] riscv: " Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 12/25] arm64: " Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 13/25] parisc: " Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 14/25] xen/x86: " Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 15/25] powerpc: " Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 16/25] m68k: Switch to new sys-off handler API Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 17/25] sh: Use do_kernel_power_off() Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 18/25] x86: " Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-28 1:15 ` Michał Mirosław
2021-11-28 21:06 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 19/25] ia64: " Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 20/25] mips: " Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 21/25] nds32: " Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 22/25] memory: emif: Use kernel_can_power_off() Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-28 1:23 ` Michał Mirosław
2021-11-28 21:04 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 23/25] ACPI: power: Switch to sys-off handler API Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:01 ` [PATCH v4 24/25] regulator: pfuze100: Use devm_register_sys_off_handler() Dmitry Osipenko
2021-11-26 18:01 ` [PATCH v4 25/25] reboot: Remove pm_power_off_prepare() Dmitry Osipenko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAMuHMdXW1bCLkJhC1Jnf2rkS1rBnXsMX=4LMVdXDvMV5HOzrLw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alankao@andestech.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dalias@libc.org \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=deanbo422@gmail.com \
--cc=deller@gmx.de \
--cc=digetx@gmail.com \
--cc=funaho@jurai.org \
--cc=gerg@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=green.hu@gmail.com \
--cc=guoren@kernel.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=jonathanh@nvidia.com \
--cc=kclin@andestech.com \
--cc=krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com \
--cc=lee.jones@linaro.org \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-csky@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mirq-linux@rere.qmqm.pl \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=p.zabel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=sre@kernel.org \
--cc=ssantosh@kernel.org \
--cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
--cc=tsbogend@alpha.franken.de \
--cc=ulf.hansson@linaro.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
--cc=ysato@users.sourceforge.jp \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).