From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Ivo Sieben <meltedpianoman@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [REPOST-v2] sched: Prevent wakeup to enter critical section needlessly
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 14:58:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121121135849.GA21030@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMSQXEGfQE_vcvk9MvP-aJD2jeF7vU+84yx_fEn==v2Jve9w0A@mail.gmail.com>
On 11/21, Ivo Sieben wrote:
> Hi
>
> 2012/11/19 Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>:
> >
> > Because on a second thought I suspect this change is wrong.
> >
> > Just for example, please look at kauditd_thread(). It does
> >
> > set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> >
> > add_wait_queue(&kauditd_wait, &wait);
> >
> > if (!CONDITION) // <-- LOAD
> > schedule();
> >
> > And the last LOAD can leak into the critical section protected by
> > wait_queue_head_t->lock, and it can be reordered with list_add()
> > inside this critical section. In this case we can race with wake_up()
> > unless it takes the same lock.
> >
> > Oleg.
> >
>
> I agree that I should solve my problem using the waitqueue_active()
> function locally. I'll abandon this patch and fix it in the
> tty_ldisc.c.
>
> But we try to understand your fault scenario: How can the LOAD leak
> into the critical section? As far as we understand the spin_unlock()
> function also contains a memory barrier
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Not really, in general unlock is a one-way barrier.
> to prevent such a reordering
> from happening.
Please look at the comment above prepare_to_wait(), for example. Or
look at wmb() in try_to_wake_up().
I guess this is not possible on x86, but in general
X;
LOCK();
UNLOCK();
Y;
can be reordered as
LOCK();
Y;
X;
UNLOCK();
UNLOCK + LOCK is the full memory barrier.
Oleg.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-11-21 13:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-24 13:06 [PATCH] RFC: sched: Prevent wakeup to enter critical section needlessly Ivo Sieben
2012-09-24 13:06 ` Ivo Sieben
2012-10-09 11:30 ` [REPOST] " Ivo Sieben
2012-10-09 11:30 ` Ivo Sieben
2012-10-09 13:37 ` Andi Kleen
2012-10-09 13:37 ` Andi Kleen
2012-10-09 14:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-10-09 15:17 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-10-10 14:02 ` Andi Kleen
2012-10-18 8:30 ` [PATCH-v2] " Ivo Sieben
2012-10-18 8:30 ` Ivo Sieben
2012-10-25 10:12 ` [REPOST-v2] " Ivo Sieben
2012-10-25 10:12 ` Ivo Sieben
2012-11-19 7:30 ` Ivo Sieben
2012-11-19 7:30 ` Ivo Sieben
2012-11-19 10:20 ` Preeti U Murthy
2012-11-19 15:10 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-11-19 15:34 ` Ivo Sieben
2012-11-19 15:49 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-11-21 13:03 ` Ivo Sieben
2012-11-21 13:47 ` Alan Cox
2012-11-21 13:58 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
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=20121121135849.GA21030@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=alan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-serial@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=meltedpianoman@gmail.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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.