From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: xlpang@redhat.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline/rtmutex: Fix a PI crash for deadline tasks
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 11:19:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160405091954.GI3448@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <57037974.1020002@redhat.com>
On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 04:38:12PM +0800, Xunlei Pang wrote:
> On 2016/04/02 at 05:51, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 09:34:24PM +0800, Xunlei Pang wrote:
> >
> >>>> I checked the code, currently only deadline accesses the
> >>>> pi_waiters/pi_waiters_leftmost
> >>>> without pi_lock held via rt_mutex_get_top_task(), other cases all have
> >>>> pi_lock held.
> >> Any better ideas is welcome.
> > Something like the below _might_ work; but its late and I haven't looked
> > at the PI code in a while. This basically caches a pointer to the top
> > waiter task in the running task_struct, under pi_lock and rq->lock, and
> > therefore we can use it with only rq->lock held.
> >
> > Since the task is blocked, and cannot unblock without taking itself from
> > the block chain -- which would cause rt_mutex_setprio() to set another
> > top waiter task, the lifetime rules should be good.
>
> In rt_mutex_slowunlock(), we release pi_lock and and wait_lock first, then
> wake up the top waiter, then call rt_mutex_adjust_prio(), so there is a small
> window without any lock or irq disabled between the top waiter wake up
> and rt_mutex_adjust_prio(), which can cause problems.
That is rt_mutex_fastunlock()'s:
bool deboost = slowfs(lock, &wake_q); /* -> rt_mutex_slowunlock() */
wake_up_q(&wake_q);
if (deboost)
rt_mutex_adjust_prio(current);
(and the IRQ enabled is irrelevant, SMP can race regardless)
> For example, before calling rt_mutex_adjust_prio() to adjust the cached pointer,
> if current is preempted and the waken top waiter exited, after that, the task is
> back, and it may enter enqueue_task_dl() before entering rt_mutex_adjust_prio(),
> where the cached pointer is updated, so it will access a stale cached pointer.
Hmm, so I would argue that that is a bug in any case. Its an effective
priority 'leak', we should deboost before letting the booster run again.
But it looks like a simple fix, simply call wake_up_q() after the
deboost. The wake_q has a reference on the task so it cannot go away,
which ensures any dereferences from within the DL code must still be
valid.
Or did I miss something (again) ? :-)
---
kernel/locking/rtmutex.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
index 3e746607abe5..36eb232bd29f 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
@@ -1390,11 +1390,11 @@ rt_mutex_fastunlock(struct rt_mutex *lock,
} else {
bool deboost = slowfn(lock, &wake_q);
- wake_up_q(&wake_q);
-
/* Undo pi boosting if necessary: */
if (deboost)
rt_mutex_adjust_prio(current);
+
+ wake_up_q(&wake_q);
}
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-05 9:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-01 11:00 [PATCH] sched/deadline/rtmutex: Fix a PI crash for deadline tasks Xunlei Pang
2016-04-01 11:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-01 12:23 ` Xunlei Pang
2016-04-01 13:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-01 13:34 ` Xunlei Pang
2016-04-01 21:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-02 10:19 ` Xunlei Pang
2016-04-05 8:38 ` Xunlei Pang
2016-04-05 9:19 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2016-04-05 9:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-05 10:48 ` Xunlei Pang
2016-04-05 11:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-08 16:25 ` Steven Rostedt
2016-04-08 17:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-08 18:50 ` Steven Rostedt
2016-04-08 18:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-08 19:15 ` Steven Rostedt
2016-04-08 19:28 ` Steven Rostedt
2016-04-09 3:27 ` Xunlei Pang
2016-04-09 3:25 ` Xunlei Pang
2016-04-09 13:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-10 8:22 ` Xunlei Pang
2016-04-12 3:08 ` Xunlei Pang
2016-04-12 15:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-13 2:13 ` Xunlei Pang
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=20160405091954.GI3448@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=juri.lelli@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=xlpang@redhat.com \
/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.