From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BUG in 2.6.20-rt8
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 17:25:13 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070226012512.GM5049@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070225062747.GA13432@elte.hu>
On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 07:27:47AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > I got the following running stock 2.6.20-rt8 on an 4-CPU 1.8GHz
> > Opteron box. The machine continued to run a few rounds of kernbench
> > and LTP. Looks a bit scary -- a tasklet was "stolen" from
> > __tasklet_action().
> >
> > Thoughts? In the meantime, kicking it off again to see if it repeats.
>
> > BUG: at kernel/softirq.c:559 __tasklet_action()
>
> this seems to happen very sporadically. Seems to happen more likely on
> hyperthreading CPUs. It is very likely caused by the
> redesign-tasklet-locking-to-be-sane patch below - which is a quick hack
> of mine from early -rt days. Can you see any obvious bug in it? The
> cmpxchg logic is certainly a bit ... tricky, locking-wise.
One thing thus far...
There is the repeated-reschedule case that looks like it can result
in a tasklet being dropped on the floor:
o __tasklet_action() runs out of "loops" (at which point,
we know TASKLET_STATE_SCHED is clear due to the prior test).
o Someone calls tasklet_schedule(), which sets TASKLET_STATE_SCHED
and calls __tasklet_schedule(), which fails in tasklet_trylock()
due to __tasklet_action() still having the TASKLET_STATE_RUN
bit set. So the tasklet is not queued.
o __tasklet_action() then forcibly unlocks, and the tasklet can
never run again, because its TASKLET_STATE_SCHED is already
set.
But this would have printed the "hm" message, which I didn't see.
And been a low-probability race on top of that.
And I have not yet come up with a better way of handling this -- and
if I did, it would likely involve more rather than less cmpxchg. ;-)
If I can figure out a reasonable assertion, I will throw it at Promela
and see what happens.
Thanx, Paul
> ---------------->
> From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
>
> tasklet redesign: make it saner and make it easier to thread.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
>
> ----
> include/linux/interrupt.h | 39 ++++++-----
> kernel/softirq.c | 155 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> 2 files changed, 128 insertions(+), 66 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux/include/linux/interrupt.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/include/linux/interrupt.h
> +++ linux/include/linux/interrupt.h
> @@ -276,8 +276,9 @@ extern void wait_for_softirq(int softirq
> to be executed on some cpu at least once after this.
> * If the tasklet is already scheduled, but its excecution is still not
> started, it will be executed only once.
> - * If this tasklet is already running on another CPU (or schedule is called
> - from tasklet itself), it is rescheduled for later.
> + * If this tasklet is already running on another CPU, it is rescheduled
> + for later.
> + * Schedule must not be called from the tasklet itself (a lockup occurs)
> * Tasklet is strictly serialized wrt itself, but not
> wrt another tasklets. If client needs some intertask synchronization,
> he makes it with spinlocks.
> @@ -302,15 +303,25 @@ struct tasklet_struct name = { NULL, 0,
> enum
> {
> TASKLET_STATE_SCHED, /* Tasklet is scheduled for execution */
> - TASKLET_STATE_RUN /* Tasklet is running (SMP only) */
> + TASKLET_STATE_RUN, /* Tasklet is running (SMP only) */
> + TASKLET_STATE_PENDING /* Tasklet is pending */
> };
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> +#define TASKLET_STATEF_SCHED (1 << TASKLET_STATE_SCHED)
> +#define TASKLET_STATEF_RUN (1 << TASKLET_STATE_RUN)
> +#define TASKLET_STATEF_PENDING (1 << TASKLET_STATE_PENDING)
> +
> +#if defined(CONFIG_SMP) || defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT)
> static inline int tasklet_trylock(struct tasklet_struct *t)
> {
> return !test_and_set_bit(TASKLET_STATE_RUN, &(t)->state);
> }
>
> +static inline int tasklet_tryunlock(struct tasklet_struct *t)
> +{
> + return cmpxchg(&t->state, TASKLET_STATEF_RUN, 0) == TASKLET_STATEF_RUN;
> +}
> +
> static inline void tasklet_unlock(struct tasklet_struct *t)
> {
> smp_mb__before_clear_bit();
> @@ -322,9 +333,10 @@ static inline void tasklet_unlock_wait(s
> while (test_bit(TASKLET_STATE_RUN, &(t)->state)) { barrier(); }
> }
> #else
> -#define tasklet_trylock(t) 1
> -#define tasklet_unlock_wait(t) do { } while (0)
> -#define tasklet_unlock(t) do { } while (0)
> +# define tasklet_trylock(t) 1
> +# define tasklet_tryunlock(t) 1
> +# define tasklet_unlock_wait(t) do { } while (0)
> +# define tasklet_unlock(t) do { } while (0)
> #endif
>
> extern void FASTCALL(__tasklet_schedule(struct tasklet_struct *t));
> @@ -357,17 +369,8 @@ static inline void tasklet_disable(struc
> smp_mb();
> }
>
> -static inline void tasklet_enable(struct tasklet_struct *t)
> -{
> - smp_mb__before_atomic_dec();
> - atomic_dec(&t->count);
> -}
> -
> -static inline void tasklet_hi_enable(struct tasklet_struct *t)
> -{
> - smp_mb__before_atomic_dec();
> - atomic_dec(&t->count);
> -}
> +extern fastcall void tasklet_enable(struct tasklet_struct *t);
> +extern fastcall void tasklet_hi_enable(struct tasklet_struct *t);
>
> extern void tasklet_kill(struct tasklet_struct *t);
> extern void tasklet_kill_immediate(struct tasklet_struct *t, unsigned int cpu);
> Index: linux/kernel/softirq.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/kernel/softirq.c
> +++ linux/kernel/softirq.c
> @@ -464,14 +464,24 @@ struct tasklet_head
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct tasklet_head, tasklet_vec) = { NULL };
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct tasklet_head, tasklet_hi_vec) = { NULL };
>
> +static void inline
> +__tasklet_common_schedule(struct tasklet_struct *t, struct tasklet_head *head, unsigned int nr)
> +{
> + if (tasklet_trylock(t)) {
> + WARN_ON(t->next != NULL);
> + t->next = head->list;
> + head->list = t;
> + raise_softirq_irqoff(nr);
> + tasklet_unlock(t);
> + }
> +}
> +
> void fastcall __tasklet_schedule(struct tasklet_struct *t)
> {
> unsigned long flags;
>
> local_irq_save(flags);
> - t->next = __get_cpu_var(tasklet_vec).list;
> - __get_cpu_var(tasklet_vec).list = t;
> - raise_softirq_irqoff(TASKLET_SOFTIRQ);
> + __tasklet_common_schedule(t, &__get_cpu_var(tasklet_vec), TASKLET_SOFTIRQ);
> local_irq_restore(flags);
> }
>
> @@ -482,81 +492,130 @@ void fastcall __tasklet_hi_schedule(stru
> unsigned long flags;
>
> local_irq_save(flags);
> - t->next = __get_cpu_var(tasklet_hi_vec).list;
> - __get_cpu_var(tasklet_hi_vec).list = t;
> - raise_softirq_irqoff(HI_SOFTIRQ);
> + __tasklet_common_schedule(t, &__get_cpu_var(tasklet_hi_vec), HI_SOFTIRQ);
> local_irq_restore(flags);
> }
>
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(__tasklet_hi_schedule);
>
> -static void tasklet_action(struct softirq_action *a)
> +void fastcall tasklet_enable(struct tasklet_struct *t)
> {
> - struct tasklet_struct *list;
> + if (!atomic_dec_and_test(&t->count))
> + return;
> + if (test_and_clear_bit(TASKLET_STATE_PENDING, &t->state))
> + tasklet_schedule(t);
> +}
>
> - local_irq_disable();
> - list = __get_cpu_var(tasklet_vec).list;
> - __get_cpu_var(tasklet_vec).list = NULL;
> - local_irq_enable();
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(tasklet_enable);
> +
> +void fastcall tasklet_hi_enable(struct tasklet_struct *t)
> +{
> + if (!atomic_dec_and_test(&t->count))
> + return;
> + if (test_and_clear_bit(TASKLET_STATE_PENDING, &t->state))
> + tasklet_hi_schedule(t);
> +}
> +
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(tasklet_hi_enable);
> +
> +static void
> +__tasklet_action(struct softirq_action *a, struct tasklet_struct *list)
> +{
> + int loops = 1000000;
>
> while (list) {
> struct tasklet_struct *t = list;
>
> list = list->next;
> + /*
> + * Should always succeed - after a tasklist got on the
> + * list (after getting the SCHED bit set from 0 to 1),
> + * nothing but the tasklet softirq it got queued to can
> + * lock it:
> + */
> + if (!tasklet_trylock(t)) {
> + WARN_ON(1);
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> + t->next = NULL;
> +
> + /*
> + * If we cannot handle the tasklet because it's disabled,
> + * mark it as pending. tasklet_enable() will later
> + * re-schedule the tasklet.
> + */
> + if (unlikely(atomic_read(&t->count))) {
> +out_disabled:
> + /* implicit unlock: */
> + wmb();
> + t->state = TASKLET_STATEF_PENDING;
> + continue;
> + }
>
> - if (tasklet_trylock(t)) {
> - if (!atomic_read(&t->count)) {
> - if (!test_and_clear_bit(TASKLET_STATE_SCHED, &t->state))
> - BUG();
> - t->func(t->data);
> + /*
> + * After this point on the tasklet might be rescheduled
> + * on another CPU, but it can only be added to another
> + * CPU's tasklet list if we unlock the tasklet (which we
> + * dont do yet).
> + */
> + if (!test_and_clear_bit(TASKLET_STATE_SCHED, &t->state))
> + WARN_ON(1);
> +
> +again:
> + t->func(t->data);
> +
> + /*
> + * Try to unlock the tasklet. We must use cmpxchg, because
> + * another CPU might have scheduled or disabled the tasklet.
> + * We only allow the STATE_RUN -> 0 transition here.
> + */
> + while (!tasklet_tryunlock(t)) {
> + /*
> + * If it got disabled meanwhile, bail out:
> + */
> + if (atomic_read(&t->count))
> + goto out_disabled;
> + /*
> + * If it got scheduled meanwhile, re-execute
> + * the tasklet function:
> + */
> + if (test_and_clear_bit(TASKLET_STATE_SCHED, &t->state))
> + goto again;
> + if (!--loops) {
> + printk("hm, tasklet state: %08lx\n", t->state);
> + WARN_ON(1);
> tasklet_unlock(t);
> - continue;
> + break;
> }
> - tasklet_unlock(t);
> }
> -
> - local_irq_disable();
> - t->next = __get_cpu_var(tasklet_vec).list;
> - __get_cpu_var(tasklet_vec).list = t;
> - __do_raise_softirq_irqoff(TASKLET_SOFTIRQ);
> - local_irq_enable();
> }
> }
>
> -static void tasklet_hi_action(struct softirq_action *a)
> +static void tasklet_action(struct softirq_action *a)
> {
> struct tasklet_struct *list;
>
> local_irq_disable();
> - list = __get_cpu_var(tasklet_hi_vec).list;
> - __get_cpu_var(tasklet_hi_vec).list = NULL;
> + list = __get_cpu_var(tasklet_vec).list;
> + __get_cpu_var(tasklet_vec).list = NULL;
> local_irq_enable();
>
> - while (list) {
> - struct tasklet_struct *t = list;
> + __tasklet_action(a, list);
> +}
>
> - list = list->next;
> +static void tasklet_hi_action(struct softirq_action *a)
> +{
> + struct tasklet_struct *list;
>
> - if (tasklet_trylock(t)) {
> - if (!atomic_read(&t->count)) {
> - if (!test_and_clear_bit(TASKLET_STATE_SCHED, &t->state))
> - BUG();
> - t->func(t->data);
> - tasklet_unlock(t);
> - continue;
> - }
> - tasklet_unlock(t);
> - }
> + local_irq_disable();
> + list = __get_cpu_var(tasklet_hi_vec).list;
> + __get_cpu_var(tasklet_hi_vec).list = NULL;
> + local_irq_enable();
>
> - local_irq_disable();
> - t->next = __get_cpu_var(tasklet_hi_vec).list;
> - __get_cpu_var(tasklet_hi_vec).list = t;
> - __do_raise_softirq_irqoff(HI_SOFTIRQ);
> - local_irq_enable();
> - }
> + __tasklet_action(a, list);
> }
>
> -
> void tasklet_init(struct tasklet_struct *t,
> void (*func)(unsigned long), unsigned long data)
> {
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-26 1:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-02-25 5:02 BUG in 2.6.20-rt8 Paul E. McKenney
2007-02-25 6:25 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-02-25 6:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-02-25 6:37 ` David Miller
2007-02-26 1:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-02-26 2:09 ` David Miller
2007-02-26 4:19 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-26 1:25 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2007-06-07 15:47 ` Steven Rostedt
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=20070226012512.GM5049@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--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.