All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [rfcomm_run] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 79 at kernel/sched/core.c:7156 __might_sleep()
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2014 21:18:46 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141002191846.GB30606@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141002165739.GC10583@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1211 bytes --]

Ah, somehow I missed this email, I already replied to the previous one.

On 10/02, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> In any case, if we change wait_woken() like the below, then we can
> simplify the loops by taking out their signal_pending checks and using
> the wait_woken() return value instead.

Yes, but let me repeat,

> +++ b/kernel/sched/wait.c
> @@ -326,8 +326,14 @@ long wait_woken(wait_queue_t *wait, unsi
>  	 * woken_wake_function() such that if we observe WQ_FLAG_WOKEN we must
>  	 * also observe all state before the wakeup.
>  	 */
> -	if (!(wait->flags & WQ_FLAG_WOKEN))
> -		timeout = schedule_timeout(timeout);
> +	if (!(wait->flags & WQ_FLAG_WOKEN)) {
> +		if (___wait_is_interruptible(mode)) {

___wait_is_interruptible() is pointless, signal_pending_state() does
the same checks. Not to mention it will always return T in this case,
note that __builtin_constant_p(state) == F.


> +		       if (signal_pending_state(mode, current))
> +			       timeout = -ERESTARTSYS;

OK, but unless I missed something this looks overcomplicated. You can
simply do this at the start of wait_woken(). Not need to play with
current->state, no need to clear WQ_FLAG_WOKEN.

Oleg.


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>,
	Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
	Jet Chen <jet.chen@intel.com>, Su Tao <tao.su@intel.com>,
	Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@intel.com>, LKP <lkp@01.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
Subject: Re: [rfcomm_run] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 79 at kernel/sched/core.c:7156 __might_sleep()
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 21:18:46 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141002191846.GB30606@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141002165739.GC10583@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>

Ah, somehow I missed this email, I already replied to the previous one.

On 10/02, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> In any case, if we change wait_woken() like the below, then we can
> simplify the loops by taking out their signal_pending checks and using
> the wait_woken() return value instead.

Yes, but let me repeat,

> +++ b/kernel/sched/wait.c
> @@ -326,8 +326,14 @@ long wait_woken(wait_queue_t *wait, unsi
>  	 * woken_wake_function() such that if we observe WQ_FLAG_WOKEN we must
>  	 * also observe all state before the wakeup.
>  	 */
> -	if (!(wait->flags & WQ_FLAG_WOKEN))
> -		timeout = schedule_timeout(timeout);
> +	if (!(wait->flags & WQ_FLAG_WOKEN)) {
> +		if (___wait_is_interruptible(mode)) {

___wait_is_interruptible() is pointless, signal_pending_state() does
the same checks. Not to mention it will always return T in this case,
note that __builtin_constant_p(state) == F.


> +		       if (signal_pending_state(mode, current))
> +			       timeout = -ERESTARTSYS;

OK, but unless I missed something this looks overcomplicated. You can
simply do this at the start of wait_woken(). Not need to play with
current->state, no need to clear WQ_FLAG_WOKEN.

Oleg.


  reply	other threads:[~2014-10-02 19:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-09-30  8:02 [rfcomm_run] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 79 at kernel/sched/core.c:7156 __might_sleep() Fengguang Wu
2014-10-02 11:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 11:09   ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 12:31   ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 12:31     ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 12:38     ` Peter Hurley
2014-10-02 12:38       ` Peter Hurley
2014-10-02 12:54       ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 12:54         ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 13:05         ` Peter Hurley
2014-10-02 13:05           ` Peter Hurley
2014-10-02 13:41           ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 13:41             ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 12:42     ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 12:42       ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 13:49       ` Peter Hurley
2014-10-02 13:49         ` Peter Hurley
2014-10-02 13:52         ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 13:52           ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 13:58           ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 13:58             ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 14:16             ` Peter Hurley
2014-10-02 14:16               ` Peter Hurley
2014-10-02 16:57               ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 16:57                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 19:18                 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2014-10-02 19:18                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-02 19:11             ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-02 19:11               ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-02 19:49               ` Peter Hurley
2014-10-02 19:49                 ` Peter Hurley
2014-10-02 19:57               ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 19:57                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 20:10       ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-02 20:10         ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-03 11:50         ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-03 11:50           ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-03 17:56           ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-03 17:56             ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-03 19:30             ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-03 19:30               ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-04  8:42               ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-04  8:42                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-06  0:25                 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-06  0:25                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-06  9:19                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-06  9:19                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-06 10:59                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-10-06 10:59                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-10-06 16:21                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-06 16:24                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-04  8:44             ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-04  8:44               ` Peter Zijlstra

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=20141002191846.GB30606@redhat.com \
    --to=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=lkp@lists.01.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.