All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -rt] ipc/sem: Rework semaphore wakeups
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 21:23:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1316028213.5040.41.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E70F6FD.2060709@colorfullife.com>

On Wed, 2011-09-14 at 20:48 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> On 09/14/2011 11:57 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Subject: ipc/sem: Rework semaphore wakeups
> > From: Peter Zijlstra<a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
> > Date: Tue Sep 13 15:09:40 CEST 2011
> >
> > Current sysv sems have a weird ass wakeup scheme that involves keeping
> > preemption disabled over a potential O(n^2) loop and busy waiting on
> > that on other CPUs.
> Have you checked that the patch improves the latency?
> Note that  the busy wait only happens if there is a simultaneous timeout 
> of a semtimedop() and a true wakeup.
> 
> The code does:
> 
>      spin_lock()
>      preempt_disable();
>      usually_very_simple_but_worstcase_O_2
>      spin_unlock()
>      usually_very_simple_but_worstcase_O_1
>      preempt_enable();
> 
> with your change, it becomes:
> 
>      spin_lock()
>      usually_very_simple_but_worstcase_O_2
>      usually_very_simple_but_worstcase_O_1
>      spin_unlock()
> 
> The complex ops remain unchanged, they are still under a lock.

preemptible lock (aka pi-mutex) on -rt, so no weird latencies.

> What about removing the preempt_disable?
> It's only there to cover a rare race on uniprocessor preempt systems.
> (a task is woken up simultaneously due to timeout of semtimedop() and a 
> true wakeup)
> 
> Then fix the that race - something like the attached patch [obviously 
> buggy - see the fixme]

sched_yield() is always a bug, as is it here. Its an life-lock if the
woken task is of higher priority than the waking task. A higher prio
FIFO task calling sched_yield() in a loop is just that, a loop, starving
the lower prio waker.

If you've got enough medium prio tasks around to occupy all other cpus,
you're got indefinite priority inversion, so even on smp its a problem.

But yeah its not the prettiest of solutions but it works.. see that
other patch with the wake-list stuff for something that ought to work
for both rt and mainline (except of course it doesn't actually work).

  reply	other threads:[~2011-09-14 19:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-09-10  9:12 [ANNOUNCE] 3.0.4-rt13 Thomas Gleixner
2011-09-10 14:53 ` Madovsky
2011-09-10 17:27 ` Rolando Martins
2011-09-11 10:35 ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-11 10:35   ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-11 17:01   ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-12  7:24     ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-09-12  8:59   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-12  9:05     ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-12 13:52     ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-12 14:53       ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-13 13:36         ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-13 15:17           ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-13 15:08         ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-13 15:28           ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-13 16:13             ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-21 10:17               ` rt14: strace -> migrate_disable_atomic imbalance Mike Galbraith
2011-09-21 17:01                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-21 18:50                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-21 18:50                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-22  4:46                   ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-22  6:31                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-22  8:38                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-22 10:00                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-22 10:00                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-22 11:55                   ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-22 12:09                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-22 13:42                       ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-22 14:05                         ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-22 15:20                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-22 14:34                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-22 14:38                           ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-22 14:41                             ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-22 14:41                             ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-22 14:46                               ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-22 14:46                                 ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-22 11:31                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-22 11:46                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-22 11:46                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-22 14:52                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-09-22 15:13                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-14  9:57             ` [PATCH -rt] ipc/sem: Rework semaphore wakeups Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-14 13:02               ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-14 18:48               ` Manfred Spraul
2011-09-14 19:23                 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2011-09-15 17:04                   ` Manfred Spraul
2011-09-12 10:04   ` [ANNOUNCE] 3.0.4-rt13 Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-12 11:33     ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-11 18:14 ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-12  7:33   ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-09-12  8:05     ` Mike Galbraith
2011-09-12  8:43       ` Mike Galbraith

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=1316028213.5040.41.camel@twins \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=manfred@colorfullife.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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.