From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
jeremy@goop.org, hugh@veritas.com, mingo@elte.hu,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, davej@redhat.com
Subject: [RFC][PATCH 3/7] lockdep: re-annotate scheduler runqueues
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:03:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080804131011.929471978@chello.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20080804130317.994042639@chello.nl
[-- Attachment #1: lockdep-sched-annotate.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 4237 bytes --]
Instead of using a per-rq lock class, use the regular nesting operations.
However, take extra care with double_lock_balance() as it can release the
already held rq->lock (and therefore change its nesting class).
So what can happen is:
spin_lock(rq->lock); // this rq subclass 0
double_lock_balance(rq, other_rq);
// release rq
// acquire other_rq->lock subclass 0
// acquire rq->lock subclass 1
spin_unlock(other_rq->lock);
leaving you with rq->lock in subclass 1
So a subsequent double_lock_balance() call can try to nest a subclass 1
lock while already holding a subclass 1 lock.
Fix this by introducing double_unlock_balance() which releases the other
rq's lock, but also re-sets the subclass for this rq's lock to 0.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
---
kernel/sched.c | 21 +++++++++++++--------
kernel/sched_rt.c | 8 +++++---
2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched.c
+++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
@@ -600,7 +600,6 @@ struct rq {
/* BKL stats */
unsigned int bkl_count;
#endif
- struct lock_class_key rq_lock_key;
};
static DEFINE_PER_CPU_SHARED_ALIGNED(struct rq, runqueues);
@@ -2759,10 +2758,10 @@ static void double_rq_lock(struct rq *rq
} else {
if (rq1 < rq2) {
spin_lock(&rq1->lock);
- spin_lock(&rq2->lock);
+ spin_lock_nested(&rq2->lock, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);
} else {
spin_lock(&rq2->lock);
- spin_lock(&rq1->lock);
+ spin_lock_nested(&rq1->lock, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);
}
}
update_rq_clock(rq1);
@@ -2805,14 +2804,21 @@ static int double_lock_balance(struct rq
if (busiest < this_rq) {
spin_unlock(&this_rq->lock);
spin_lock(&busiest->lock);
- spin_lock(&this_rq->lock);
+ spin_lock_nested(&this_rq->lock, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);
ret = 1;
} else
- spin_lock(&busiest->lock);
+ spin_lock_nested(&busiest->lock, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);
}
return ret;
}
+static void double_unlock_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq *busiest)
+ __releases(busiest->lock)
+{
+ spin_unlock(&busiest->lock);
+ lock_set_subclass(&this_rq->lock.dep_map, 0, _RET_IP_);
+}
+
/*
* If dest_cpu is allowed for this process, migrate the task to it.
* This is accomplished by forcing the cpu_allowed mask to only
@@ -3637,7 +3643,7 @@ redo:
ld_moved = move_tasks(this_rq, this_cpu, busiest,
imbalance, sd, CPU_NEWLY_IDLE,
&all_pinned);
- spin_unlock(&busiest->lock);
+ double_unlock_balance(this_rq, busiest);
if (unlikely(all_pinned)) {
cpu_clear(cpu_of(busiest), *cpus);
@@ -3752,7 +3758,7 @@ static void active_load_balance(struct r
else
schedstat_inc(sd, alb_failed);
}
- spin_unlock(&target_rq->lock);
+ double_unlock_balance(busiest_rq, target_rq);
}
#ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ
@@ -8000,7 +8006,6 @@ void __init sched_init(void)
rq = cpu_rq(i);
spin_lock_init(&rq->lock);
- lockdep_set_class(&rq->lock, &rq->rq_lock_key);
rq->nr_running = 0;
init_cfs_rq(&rq->cfs, rq);
init_rt_rq(&rq->rt, rq);
Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched_rt.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched_rt.c
+++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched_rt.c
@@ -861,6 +861,8 @@ static void put_prev_task_rt(struct rq *
#define RT_MAX_TRIES 3
static int double_lock_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq *busiest);
+static void double_unlock_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq *busiest);
+
static void deactivate_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int sleep);
static int pick_rt_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int cpu)
@@ -1022,7 +1024,7 @@ static struct rq *find_lock_lowest_rq(st
break;
/* try again */
- spin_unlock(&lowest_rq->lock);
+ double_unlock_balance(rq, lowest_rq);
lowest_rq = NULL;
}
@@ -1091,7 +1093,7 @@ static int push_rt_task(struct rq *rq)
resched_task(lowest_rq->curr);
- spin_unlock(&lowest_rq->lock);
+ double_unlock_balance(rq, lowest_rq);
ret = 1;
out:
@@ -1197,7 +1199,7 @@ static int pull_rt_task(struct rq *this_
}
skip:
- spin_unlock(&src_rq->lock);
+ double_unlock_balance(this_rq, src_rq);
}
return ret;
--
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-04 13:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 73+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-04 13:03 [RFC][PATCH 0/7] lockdep Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-04 13:03 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/7] lockdep: Fix combinatorial explosion in lock subgraph traversal Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-05 8:34 ` David Miller
2008-08-05 8:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-13 3:48 ` Tim Pepper
2008-08-13 10:56 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-04 13:03 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/7] lockdep: lock_set_subclass - reset a held locks subclass Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-05 8:35 ` David Miller
2008-08-04 13:03 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2008-08-05 8:35 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/7] lockdep: re-annotate scheduler runqueues David Miller
2008-08-04 13:03 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/7] lockdep: shrink held_lock structure Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-05 16:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-06 7:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-04 13:03 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/7] lockdep: map_acquire Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-04 13:03 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/7] lockdep: lock protection locks Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-04 13:03 ` [RFC][PATCH 7/7] lockdep: spin_lock_nest_lock() Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-04 14:07 ` Roland Dreier
2008-08-04 14:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-04 14:26 ` Roland Dreier
2008-08-04 14:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-04 14:53 ` Dave Jones
2008-08-04 14:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-04 16:26 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2008-08-04 16:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-04 17:27 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2008-08-04 17:46 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2008-08-04 17:57 ` [PATCH] workaround minor lockdep bug triggered by mm_take_all_locks Andrea Arcangeli
2008-08-04 18:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-04 18:56 ` Roland Dreier
2008-08-04 19:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-04 20:15 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2008-08-04 20:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-04 21:09 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2008-08-04 21:14 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-08-04 21:30 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2008-08-04 21:41 ` Andrew Morton
2008-08-04 22:12 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2008-08-04 21:42 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-08-04 22:30 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2008-08-04 23:38 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-08-05 0:47 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2008-08-04 21:27 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-08-04 21:54 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2008-08-04 21:57 ` David Miller
2008-08-05 2:00 ` Roland Dreier
2008-08-05 2:18 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2008-08-05 12:02 ` Roland Dreier
2008-08-05 12:20 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2008-08-04 18:48 ` [RFC][PATCH 7/7] lockdep: spin_lock_nest_lock() Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-04 21:32 ` David Miller
2008-08-04 18:06 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-08-04 18:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-04 19:26 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-08-04 19:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-08-04 19:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-04 20:16 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-10-08 15:27 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-10-08 15:43 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-10-08 16:03 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-10-08 16:19 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-10-08 16:53 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-10-08 15:52 ` Nick Piggin
2008-10-08 17:18 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-08-07 11:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-07 11:25 ` [RFC][PATCH 8/7] lockdep: annotate mm_take_all_locks() Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-07 11:25 ` [RFC][PATCH 9/7] mm: fix mm_take_all_locks() locking order Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-07 12:14 ` Hugh Dickins
2008-08-07 12:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-07 13:27 ` Hugh Dickins
2008-08-07 21:46 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2008-08-08 1:34 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2008-08-08 7:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-11 10:08 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/7] lockdep Ingo Molnar
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=20080804131011.929471978@chello.nl \
--to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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.