linux-stable.git/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h, branch linux-5.4.y Linux kernel stable tree rcu: Suppress smp_processor_id() complaint in synchronize_rcu_expedited_wait() 2023-03-11T15:43:54+00:00 Paul E. McKenney paulmck@kernel.org 2022-12-16T23:55:48+00:00 596d1fea0519ef00cc73c371ab85b081ab9c4cf3 [ Upstream commit 2d7f00b2f01301d6e41fd4a28030dab0442265be ] The normal grace period's RCU CPU stall warnings are invoked from the scheduling-clock interrupt handler, and can thus invoke smp_processor_id() with impunity, which allows them to directly invoke dump_cpu_task(). In contrast, the expedited grace period's RCU CPU stall warnings are invoked from process context, which causes the dump_cpu_task() function's calls to smp_processor_id() to complain bitterly in debug kernels. This commit therefore causes synchronize_rcu_expedited_wait() to disable preemption around its call to dump_cpu_task(). Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> 
[ Upstream commit 2d7f00b2f01301d6e41fd4a28030dab0442265be ]

The normal grace period's RCU CPU stall warnings are invoked from the
scheduling-clock interrupt handler, and can thus invoke smp_processor_id()
with impunity, which allows them to directly invoke dump_cpu_task().
In contrast, the expedited grace period's RCU CPU stall warnings are
invoked from process context, which causes the dump_cpu_task() function's
calls to smp_processor_id() to complain bitterly in debug kernels.

This commit therefore causes synchronize_rcu_expedited_wait() to disable
preemption around its call to dump_cpu_task().

Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
rcu/exp: Mark current CPU as exp-QS in IPI loop second pass 2022-01-27T08:19:33+00:00 Frederic Weisbecker frederic@kernel.org 2021-11-30T16:21:08+00:00 236399a60ec981b395b92a5e557cf0130c436c56 [ Upstream commit 81f6d49cce2d2fe507e3fddcc4a6db021d9c2e7b ] Expedited RCU grace periods invoke sync_rcu_exp_select_node_cpus(), which takes two passes over the leaf rcu_node structure's CPUs. The first pass gathers up the current CPU and CPUs that are in dynticks idle mode. The workqueue will report a quiescent state on their behalf later. The second pass sends IPIs to the rest of the CPUs, but excludes the current CPU, incorrectly assuming it has been included in the first pass's list of CPUs. Unfortunately the current CPU may have changed between the first and second pass, due to the fact that the various rcu_node structures' ->lock fields have been dropped, thus momentarily enabling preemption. This means that if the second pass's CPU was not on the first pass's list, it will be ignored completely. There will be no IPI sent to it, and there will be no reporting of quiescent states on its behalf. Unfortunately, the expedited grace period will nevertheless be waiting for that CPU to report a quiescent state, but with that CPU having no reason to believe that such a report is needed. The result will be an expedited grace period stall. Fix this by no longer excluding the current CPU from consideration during the second pass. Fixes: b9ad4d6ed18e ("rcu: Avoid self-IPI in sync_rcu_exp_select_node_cpus()") Reviewed-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@quicinc.com> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org> Cc: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com> Cc: Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@quicinc.com> Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> Cc: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> Cc: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> 
[ Upstream commit 81f6d49cce2d2fe507e3fddcc4a6db021d9c2e7b ]

Expedited RCU grace periods invoke sync_rcu_exp_select_node_cpus(), which
takes two passes over the leaf rcu_node structure's CPUs.  The first
pass gathers up the current CPU and CPUs that are in dynticks idle mode.
The workqueue will report a quiescent state on their behalf later.
The second pass sends IPIs to the rest of the CPUs, but excludes the
current CPU, incorrectly assuming it has been included in the first
pass's list of CPUs.

Unfortunately the current CPU may have changed between the first and
second pass, due to the fact that the various rcu_node structures'
->lock fields have been dropped, thus momentarily enabling preemption.
This means that if the second pass's CPU was not on the first pass's
list, it will be ignored completely.  There will be no IPI sent to
it, and there will be no reporting of quiescent states on its behalf.
Unfortunately, the expedited grace period will nevertheless be waiting
for that CPU to report a quiescent state, but with that CPU having no
reason to believe that such a report is needed.

The result will be an expedited grace period stall.

Fix this by no longer excluding the current CPU from consideration during
the second pass.

Fixes: b9ad4d6ed18e ("rcu: Avoid self-IPI in sync_rcu_exp_select_node_cpus()")
Reviewed-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@quicinc.com>
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Cc: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>
Cc: Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@quicinc.com>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
Cc: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
rcu: Fix existing exp request check in sync_sched_exp_online_cleanup() 2021-11-17T08:48:33+00:00 Neeraj Upadhyay neeraju@codeaurora.org 2021-08-18T08:04:00+00:00 6a93d8ebb8aa1b3ed14e646aa063b28dfb3b8784 [ Upstream commit f0b2b2df5423fb369ac762c77900bc7765496d58 ] The sync_sched_exp_online_cleanup() checks to see if RCU needs an expedited quiescent state from the incoming CPU, sending it an IPI if so. Before sending IPI, it checks whether expedited qs need has been already requested for the incoming CPU, by checking rcu_data.cpu_no_qs.b.exp for the current cpu, on which sync_sched_exp_online_cleanup() is running. This works for the case where incoming CPU is same as self. However, for the case where incoming CPU is different from self, expedited request won't get marked, which can potentially delay reporting of expedited quiescent state for the incoming CPU. Fixes: e015a3411220 ("rcu: Avoid self-IPI in sync_sched_exp_online_cleanup()") Signed-off-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@codeaurora.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> 
[ Upstream commit f0b2b2df5423fb369ac762c77900bc7765496d58 ]

The sync_sched_exp_online_cleanup() checks to see if RCU needs
an expedited quiescent state from the incoming CPU, sending it
an IPI if so. Before sending IPI, it checks whether expedited
qs need has been already requested for the incoming CPU, by
checking rcu_data.cpu_no_qs.b.exp for the current cpu, on which
sync_sched_exp_online_cleanup() is running. This works for the
case where incoming CPU is same as self. However, for the case
where incoming CPU is different from self, expedited request
won't get marked, which can potentially delay reporting of
expedited quiescent state for the incoming CPU.

Fixes: e015a3411220 ("rcu: Avoid self-IPI in sync_sched_exp_online_cleanup()")
Signed-off-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@codeaurora.org>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
rcu: Allow only one expedited GP to run concurrently with wakeups 2020-03-05T15:43:50+00:00 Neeraj Upadhyay neeraju@codeaurora.org 2019-11-19T19:50:52+00:00 ef0dcab6d21cc2e717ad8d9e4138646c8c7bd886 commit 4bc6b745e5cbefed92c48071e28a5f41246d0470 upstream. The current expedited RCU grace-period code expects that a task requesting an expedited grace period cannot awaken until that grace period has reached the wakeup phase. However, it is possible for a long preemption to result in the waiting task never sleeping. For example, consider the following sequence of events: 1. Task A starts an expedited grace period by invoking synchronize_rcu_expedited(). It proceeds normally up to the wait_event() near the end of that function, and is then preempted (or interrupted or whatever). 2. The expedited grace period completes, and a kworker task starts the awaken phase, having incremented the counter and acquired the rcu_state structure's .exp_wake_mutex. This kworker task is then preempted or interrupted or whatever. 3. Task A resumes and enters wait_event(), which notes that the expedited grace period has completed, and thus doesn't sleep. 4. Task B starts an expedited grace period exactly as did Task A, complete with the preemption (or whatever delay) just before the call to wait_event(). 5. The expedited grace period completes, and another kworker task starts the awaken phase, having incremented the counter. However, it blocks when attempting to acquire the rcu_state structure's .exp_wake_mutex because step 2's kworker task has not yet released it. 6. Steps 4 and 5 repeat, resulting in overflow of the rcu_node structure's ->exp_wq[] array. In theory, this is harmless. Tasks waiting on the various ->exp_wq[] array will just be spuriously awakened, but they will just sleep again on noting that the rcu_state structure's ->expedited_sequence value has not advanced far enough. In practice, this wastes CPU time and is an accident waiting to happen. This commit therefore moves the rcu_exp_gp_seq_end() call that officially ends the expedited grace period (along with associate tracing) until after the ->exp_wake_mutex has been acquired. This prevents Task A from awakening prematurely, thus preventing more than one expedited grace period from being in flight during a previous expedited grace period's wakeup phase. Fixes: 3b5f668e715b ("rcu: Overlap wakeups with next expedited grace period") Signed-off-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@codeaurora.org> [ paulmck: Added updated comment. ] Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> 
commit 4bc6b745e5cbefed92c48071e28a5f41246d0470 upstream.

The current expedited RCU grace-period code expects that a task
requesting an expedited grace period cannot awaken until that grace
period has reached the wakeup phase.  However, it is possible for a long
preemption to result in the waiting task never sleeping.  For example,
consider the following sequence of events:

1.	Task A starts an expedited grace period by invoking
	synchronize_rcu_expedited().  It proceeds normally up to the
	wait_event() near the end of that function, and is then preempted
	(or interrupted or whatever).

2.	The expedited grace period completes, and a kworker task starts
	the awaken phase, having incremented the counter and acquired
	the rcu_state structure's .exp_wake_mutex.  This kworker task
	is then preempted or interrupted or whatever.

3.	Task A resumes and enters wait_event(), which notes that the
	expedited grace period has completed, and thus doesn't sleep.

4.	Task B starts an expedited grace period exactly as did Task A,
	complete with the preemption (or whatever delay) just before
	the call to wait_event().

5.	The expedited grace period completes, and another kworker
	task starts the awaken phase, having incremented the counter.
	However, it blocks when attempting to acquire the rcu_state
	structure's .exp_wake_mutex because step 2's kworker task has
	not yet released it.

6.	Steps 4 and 5 repeat, resulting in overflow of the rcu_node
	structure's ->exp_wq[] array.

In theory, this is harmless.  Tasks waiting on the various ->exp_wq[]
array will just be spuriously awakened, but they will just sleep again
on noting that the rcu_state structure's ->expedited_sequence value has
not advanced far enough.

In practice, this wastes CPU time and is an accident waiting to happen.
This commit therefore moves the rcu_exp_gp_seq_end() call that officially
ends the expedited grace period (along with associate tracing) until
after the ->exp_wake_mutex has been acquired.  This prevents Task A from
awakening prematurely, thus preventing more than one expedited grace
period from being in flight during a previous expedited grace period's
wakeup phase.

Fixes: 3b5f668e715b ("rcu: Overlap wakeups with next expedited grace period")
Signed-off-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@codeaurora.org>
[ paulmck: Added updated comment. ]
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
rcu: Fix missed wakeup of exp_wq waiters 2020-02-24T07:36:22+00:00 Neeraj Upadhyay neeraju@codeaurora.org 2019-11-19T03:17:07+00:00 b7725deb9d611443040807787e17364191d30f9a [ Upstream commit fd6bc19d7676a060a171d1cf3dcbf6fd797eb05f ] Tasks waiting within exp_funnel_lock() for an expedited grace period to elapse can be starved due to the following sequence of events: 1. Tasks A and B both attempt to start an expedited grace period at about the same time. This grace period will have completed when the lower four bits of the rcu_state structure's ->expedited_sequence field are 0b'0100', for example, when the initial value of this counter is zero. Task A wins, and thus does the actual work of starting the grace period, including acquiring the rcu_state structure's .exp_mutex and sets the counter to 0b'0001'. 2. Because task B lost the race to start the grace period, it waits on ->expedited_sequence to reach 0b'0100' inside of exp_funnel_lock(). This task therefore blocks on the rcu_node structure's ->exp_wq[1] field, keeping in mind that the end-of-grace-period value of ->expedited_sequence (0b'0100') is shifted down two bits before indexing the ->exp_wq[] field. 3. Task C attempts to start another expedited grace period, but blocks on ->exp_mutex, which is still held by Task A. 4. The aforementioned expedited grace period completes, so that ->expedited_sequence now has the value 0b'0100'. A kworker task therefore acquires the rcu_state structure's ->exp_wake_mutex and starts awakening any tasks waiting for this grace period. 5. One of the first tasks awakened happens to be Task A. Task A therefore releases the rcu_state structure's ->exp_mutex, which allows Task C to start the next expedited grace period, which causes the lower four bits of the rcu_state structure's ->expedited_sequence field to become 0b'0101'. 6. Task C's expedited grace period completes, so that the lower four bits of the rcu_state structure's ->expedited_sequence field now become 0b'1000'. 7. The kworker task from step 4 above continues its wakeups. Unfortunately, the wake_up_all() refetches the rcu_state structure's .expedited_sequence field: wake_up_all(&rnp->exp_wq[rcu_seq_ctr(rcu_state.expedited_sequence) & 0x3]); This results in the wakeup being applied to the rcu_node structure's ->exp_wq[2] field, which is unfortunate given that Task B is instead waiting on ->exp_wq[1]. On a busy system, no harm is done (or at least no permanent harm is done). Some later expedited grace period will redo the wakeup. But on a quiet system, such as many embedded systems, it might be a good long time before there was another expedited grace period. On such embedded systems, this situation could therefore result in a system hang. This issue manifested as DPM device timeout during suspend (which usually qualifies as a quiet time) due to a SCSI device being stuck in _synchronize_rcu_expedited(), with the following stack trace: schedule() synchronize_rcu_expedited() synchronize_rcu() scsi_device_quiesce() scsi_bus_suspend() dpm_run_callback() __device_suspend() This commit therefore prevents such delays, timeouts, and hangs by making rcu_exp_wait_wake() use its "s" argument consistently instead of refetching from rcu_state.expedited_sequence. Fixes: 3b5f668e715b ("rcu: Overlap wakeups with next expedited grace period") Signed-off-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@codeaurora.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> 
[ Upstream commit fd6bc19d7676a060a171d1cf3dcbf6fd797eb05f ]

Tasks waiting within exp_funnel_lock() for an expedited grace period to
elapse can be starved due to the following sequence of events:

1.	Tasks A and B both attempt to start an expedited grace
	period at about the same time.	This grace period will have
	completed when the lower four bits of the rcu_state structure's
	->expedited_sequence field are 0b'0100', for example, when the
	initial value of this counter is zero.	Task A wins, and thus
	does the actual work of starting the grace period, including
	acquiring the rcu_state structure's .exp_mutex and sets the
	counter to 0b'0001'.

2.	Because task B lost the race to start the grace period, it
	waits on ->expedited_sequence to reach 0b'0100' inside of
	exp_funnel_lock(). This task therefore blocks on the rcu_node
	structure's ->exp_wq[1] field, keeping in mind that the
	end-of-grace-period value of ->expedited_sequence (0b'0100')
	is shifted down two bits before indexing the ->exp_wq[] field.

3.	Task C attempts to start another expedited grace period,
	but blocks on ->exp_mutex, which is still held by Task A.

4.	The aforementioned expedited grace period completes, so that
	->expedited_sequence now has the value 0b'0100'.  A kworker task
	therefore acquires the rcu_state structure's ->exp_wake_mutex
	and starts awakening any tasks waiting for this grace period.

5.	One of the first tasks awakened happens to be Task A.  Task A
	therefore releases the rcu_state structure's ->exp_mutex,
	which allows Task C to start the next expedited grace period,
	which causes the lower four bits of the rcu_state structure's
	->expedited_sequence field to become 0b'0101'.

6.	Task C's expedited grace period completes, so that the lower four
	bits of the rcu_state structure's ->expedited_sequence field now
	become 0b'1000'.

7.	The kworker task from step 4 above continues its wakeups.
	Unfortunately, the wake_up_all() refetches the rcu_state
	structure's .expedited_sequence field:

	wake_up_all(&rnp->exp_wq[rcu_seq_ctr(rcu_state.expedited_sequence) & 0x3]);

	This results in the wakeup being applied to the rcu_node
	structure's ->exp_wq[2] field, which is unfortunate given that
	Task B is instead waiting on ->exp_wq[1].

On a busy system, no harm is done (or at least no permanent harm is done).
Some later expedited grace period will redo the wakeup.  But on a quiet
system, such as many embedded systems, it might be a good long time before
there was another expedited grace period.  On such embedded systems,
this situation could therefore result in a system hang.

This issue manifested as DPM device timeout during suspend (which
usually qualifies as a quiet time) due to a SCSI device being stuck in
_synchronize_rcu_expedited(), with the following stack trace:

	schedule()
	synchronize_rcu_expedited()
	synchronize_rcu()
	scsi_device_quiesce()
	scsi_bus_suspend()
	dpm_run_callback()
	__device_suspend()

This commit therefore prevents such delays, timeouts, and hangs by
making rcu_exp_wait_wake() use its "s" argument consistently instead of
refetching from rcu_state.expedited_sequence.

Fixes: 3b5f668e715b ("rcu: Overlap wakeups with next expedited grace period")
Signed-off-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@codeaurora.org>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
rcu: Use *_ONCE() to protect lockless ->expmask accesses 2020-02-11T12:35:08+00:00 Paul E. McKenney paulmck@kernel.org 2019-10-08T01:53:18+00:00 a523031513b755ab7b3b556b78ff0a385cc3498c commit 15c7c972cd26d89a26788e609c53b5a465324a6c upstream. The rcu_node structure's ->expmask field is accessed locklessly when starting a new expedited grace period and when reporting an expedited RCU CPU stall warning. This commit therefore handles the former by taking a snapshot of ->expmask while the lock is held and the latter by applying READ_ONCE() to lockless reads and WRITE_ONCE() to the corresponding updates. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CANpmjNNmSOagbTpffHr4=Yedckx9Rm2NuGqC9UqE+AOz5f1-ZQ@mail.gmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+134336b86f728d6e55a0@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> Acked-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> 
commit 15c7c972cd26d89a26788e609c53b5a465324a6c upstream.

The rcu_node structure's ->expmask field is accessed locklessly when
starting a new expedited grace period and when reporting an expedited
RCU CPU stall warning.  This commit therefore handles the former by
taking a snapshot of ->expmask while the lock is held and the latter
by applying READ_ONCE() to lockless reads and WRITE_ONCE() to the
corresponding updates.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CANpmjNNmSOagbTpffHr4=Yedckx9Rm2NuGqC9UqE+AOz5f1-ZQ@mail.gmail.com
Reported-by: syzbot+134336b86f728d6e55a0@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
rcu: Fix spelling mistake "greate"->"great" 2019-08-12T18:25:06+00:00 Mukesh Ojha mojha@codeaurora.org 2019-07-29T07:55:57+00:00 511b44f7598ce602f9efce687ca9eec013967d9b This commit fixes a spelling mistake in file tree_exp.h. Signed-off-by: Mukesh Ojha <mojha@codeaurora.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.ibm.com> 
This commit fixes a spelling mistake in file tree_exp.h.

Signed-off-by: Mukesh Ojha <mojha@codeaurora.org>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>
rcu: Add destroy_work_on_stack() to match INIT_WORK_ONSTACK() 2019-08-01T21:05:51+00:00 Paul E. McKenney paulmck@linux.ibm.com 2019-06-19T22:42:51+00:00 fbad01af8c3bb9618848abde8054ab7e0c2330fe The synchronize_rcu_expedited() function has an INIT_WORK_ONSTACK(), but lacks the corresponding destroy_work_on_stack(). This commit therefore adds destroy_work_on_stack(). Reported-by: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.ibm.com> Acked-by: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com> 
The synchronize_rcu_expedited() function has an INIT_WORK_ONSTACK(),
but lacks the corresponding destroy_work_on_stack().  This commit
therefore adds destroy_work_on_stack().

Reported-by: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Merge branches 'consolidate.2019.05.28a', 'doc.2019.05.28a', 'fixes.2019.06.13a', 'srcu.2019.05.28a', 'sync.2019.05.28a' and 'torture.2019.05.28a' into HEAD 2019-06-19T16:21:46+00:00 Paul E. McKenney paulmck@linux.ibm.com 2019-06-19T16:21:46+00:00 11ca7a9d541d09586fbf89290d1e14619cc40de0 consolidate.2019.05.28a: RCU flavor consolidation cleanups and optmizations. doc.2019.05.28a: Documentation updates. fixes.2019.06.13a: Miscellaneous fixes. srcu.2019.05.28a: SRCU updates. sync.2019.05.28a: RCU-sync flavor consolidation. torture.2019.05.28a: Torture-test updates. 
consolidate.2019.05.28a: RCU flavor consolidation cleanups and optmizations.
doc.2019.05.28a: Documentation updates.
fixes.2019.06.13a: Miscellaneous fixes.
srcu.2019.05.28a: SRCU updates.
sync.2019.05.28a: RCU-sync flavor consolidation.
torture.2019.05.28a: Torture-test updates.
rcu: Upgrade sync_exp_work_done() to smp_mb() 2019-06-13T22:33:19+00:00 Paul E. McKenney paulmck@linux.ibm.com 2019-04-20T08:40:54+00:00 96050c68be33edef18800ad6748f61f81db81a20 The sync_exp_work_done() function uses smp_mb__before_atomic(), but there is no obvious atomic in the ensuing code. The ordering is absolutely required for grace periods to work correctly, so this commit upgrades the smp_mb__before_atomic() to smp_mb(). Fixes: 6fba2b3767ea ("rcu: Remove deprecated RCU debugfs tracing code") Reported-by: Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.ibm.com> 
The sync_exp_work_done() function uses smp_mb__before_atomic(), but
there is no obvious atomic in the ensuing code.  The ordering is
absolutely required for grace periods to work correctly, so this
commit upgrades the smp_mb__before_atomic() to smp_mb().

Fixes: 6fba2b3767ea ("rcu: Remove deprecated RCU debugfs tracing code")
Reported-by: Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>