From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: frank.rowand@am.sony.com
Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 14/18] sched: Remove rq->lock from the first half of ttwu()
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2011 18:16:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1296753411.26581.464.camel@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D4367CA.2030303@am.sony.com>
On Fri, 2011-01-28 at 17:05 -0800, Frank Rowand wrote:
>
> The deadlock can occur if __ARCH_WANT_UNLOCKED_CTXSW and
> __ARCH_WANT_INTERRUPTS_ON_CTXSW are defined.
>
> A task sets p->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE, then calls schedule().
>
> schedule()
> prev->on_rq = 0
> context_switch()
> prepare_task_switch()
> prepare_lock_switch()
> raw_spin_unlock_irq(&rq->lock)
>
> At this point, a pending interrupt (on this same cpu) is handled.
> The interrupt handling results in a call to try_to_wake_up() on the
> current process. The try_to_wake_up() gets into:
>
> while (p->on_cpu)
> cpu_relax();
>
> and spins forever. This is because "prev->on_cpu = 0" slightly
> after this point at:
>
> finish_task_switch()
> finish_lock_switch()
> prev->on_cpu = 0
Right, very good spot!
>
> One possible fix would be to get rid of __ARCH_WANT_INTERRUPTS_ON_CTXSW.
> I don't suspect the reaction to that suggestion will be very positive...
:-), afaik some architectures requires this, ie. removing this would
require dropping whole architectures.
> Another fix might be:
>
> while (p->on_cpu) {
> if (p == current)
> goto out_activate;
> cpu_relax();
> }
>
> Then add back in the out_activate label.
>
> I don't know if the second fix is good -- I haven't thought out how
> it impacts the later patches in the series.
Right, I've done something similar to this, simply short-circuit the cpu
selection to force it to activate the task on the local cpu.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-03 17:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-04 14:59 [RFC][PATCH 00/18] sched: Reduce runqueue lock contention -v4 Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 01/18] sched: Always provide p->on_cpu Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 02/18] mutex: Use p->on_cpu for the adaptive spin Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 03/18] sched: Change the ttwu success details Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 04/18] sched: Clean up ttwu stats Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 05/18] sched: Provide p->on_rq Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-05 8:13 ` Yong Zhang
2011-01-05 9:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-29 0:10 ` Frank Rowand
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 06/18] sched: Serialize p->cpus_allowed and ttwu() using p->pi_lock Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 07/18] sched: Drop the rq argument to sched_class::select_task_rq() Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-06 13:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-06 14:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 08/18] sched: Remove rq argument to sched_class::task_waking() Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 09/18] sched: Delay task_contributes_to_load() Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 10/18] sched: Also serialize ttwu_local() with p->pi_lock Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 11/18] sched: Add p->pi_lock to task_rq_lock() Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-05 18:46 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-01-05 19:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-29 0:21 ` Frank Rowand
2011-02-03 17:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-02-03 17:49 ` Frank Rowand
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 12/18] sched: Drop rq->lock from first part of wake_up_new_task() Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 13/18] sched: Drop rq->lock from sched_exec() Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 14/18] sched: Remove rq->lock from the first half of ttwu() Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-06 16:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-29 1:05 ` Frank Rowand
2011-02-03 17:16 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 15/18] sched: Remove rq argument from ttwu_stat() Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 16/18] sched: Rename ttwu_post_activation Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-29 1:08 ` Frank Rowand
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 17/18] sched: Move the second half of ttwu() to the remote cpu Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-05 21:07 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-01-06 15:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-07 15:22 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-01-18 16:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-19 19:37 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-01-29 0:04 ` Frank Rowand
2011-02-03 17:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 18/18] sched: Sort hotplug vs ttwu queueing Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-05 20:47 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-01-06 10:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 15:16 ` [RFC][PATCH 00/18] sched: Reduce runqueue lock contention -v4 Ingo Molnar
2011-01-29 1:20 ` Frank Rowand
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=1296753411.26581.464.camel@laptop \
--to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=frank.rowand@am.sony.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=yong.zhang0@gmail.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.