From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: [PATCH] kthread: to_live_kthread() needs try_get_task_stack()
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 20:03:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160629180357.GA7178@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrUng61Fe2+RSp5r6fsOkcUKDqnf-u39TUrgO76pHMqFsA@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2323 bytes --]
On 06/29, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
> I pushed that change to my tree (seems to work well enough to boot
> without warnings as long as I don't unmount XFS, but not particularly
> well tested). Want to refresh your patch on top?
Please see the trivial fix below. Compile tested, but looks obvious.
Btw, why free_thread_stack() calls vfree() with irqs disabled? Doesn't
look good and perhaps even wrong; at least vmap_debug_free_range() does
flush_tlb_kernel_range() and smp_call_function() can deadlock?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [PATCH] kthread: to_live_kthread() needs try_get_task_stack()
get_task_struct(tsk) no longer pins tsk->stack so all users of
to_live_kthread() should do try_get_task_stack/put_task_stack to protect
"struct kthread" which lives on kthread's stack.
TODO: Kill to_live_kthread(), perhaps we can even kill "struct kthread" too,
and rework kthread_stop(), it can use task_work_add() to sync with the exiting
kernel thread.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
---
kernel/kthread.c | 8 ++++++--
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/kthread.c b/kernel/kthread.c
index 9ff173d..4ab4c37 100644
--- a/kernel/kthread.c
+++ b/kernel/kthread.c
@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ static inline struct kthread *to_kthread(struct task_struct *k)
static struct kthread *to_live_kthread(struct task_struct *k)
{
struct completion *vfork = ACCESS_ONCE(k->vfork_done);
- if (likely(vfork))
+ if (likely(vfork) && try_get_task_stack(k))
return __to_kthread(vfork);
return NULL;
}
@@ -425,8 +425,10 @@ void kthread_unpark(struct task_struct *k)
{
struct kthread *kthread = to_live_kthread(k);
- if (kthread)
+ if (kthread) {
__kthread_unpark(k, kthread);
+ put_task_stack(k);
+ }
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kthread_unpark);
@@ -455,6 +457,7 @@ int kthread_park(struct task_struct *k)
wait_for_completion(&kthread->parked);
}
}
+ put_task_stack(k);
ret = 0;
}
return ret;
@@ -490,6 +493,7 @@ int kthread_stop(struct task_struct *k)
__kthread_unpark(k, kthread);
wake_up_process(k);
wait_for_completion(&kthread->exited);
+ put_task_stack(k);
}
ret = k->exit_code;
put_task_struct(k);
--
2.5.0
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
LKP <lkp@01.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel test robot <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH] kthread: to_live_kthread() needs try_get_task_stack()
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 20:03:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160629180357.GA7178@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrUng61Fe2+RSp5r6fsOkcUKDqnf-u39TUrgO76pHMqFsA@mail.gmail.com>
On 06/29, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
> I pushed that change to my tree (seems to work well enough to boot
> without warnings as long as I don't unmount XFS, but not particularly
> well tested). Want to refresh your patch on top?
Please see the trivial fix below. Compile tested, but looks obvious.
Btw, why free_thread_stack() calls vfree() with irqs disabled? Doesn't
look good and perhaps even wrong; at least vmap_debug_free_range() does
flush_tlb_kernel_range() and smp_call_function() can deadlock?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [PATCH] kthread: to_live_kthread() needs try_get_task_stack()
get_task_struct(tsk) no longer pins tsk->stack so all users of
to_live_kthread() should do try_get_task_stack/put_task_stack to protect
"struct kthread" which lives on kthread's stack.
TODO: Kill to_live_kthread(), perhaps we can even kill "struct kthread" too,
and rework kthread_stop(), it can use task_work_add() to sync with the exiting
kernel thread.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
---
kernel/kthread.c | 8 ++++++--
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/kthread.c b/kernel/kthread.c
index 9ff173d..4ab4c37 100644
--- a/kernel/kthread.c
+++ b/kernel/kthread.c
@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ static inline struct kthread *to_kthread(struct task_struct *k)
static struct kthread *to_live_kthread(struct task_struct *k)
{
struct completion *vfork = ACCESS_ONCE(k->vfork_done);
- if (likely(vfork))
+ if (likely(vfork) && try_get_task_stack(k))
return __to_kthread(vfork);
return NULL;
}
@@ -425,8 +425,10 @@ void kthread_unpark(struct task_struct *k)
{
struct kthread *kthread = to_live_kthread(k);
- if (kthread)
+ if (kthread) {
__kthread_unpark(k, kthread);
+ put_task_stack(k);
+ }
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kthread_unpark);
@@ -455,6 +457,7 @@ int kthread_park(struct task_struct *k)
wait_for_completion(&kthread->parked);
}
}
+ put_task_stack(k);
ret = 0;
}
return ret;
@@ -490,6 +493,7 @@ int kthread_stop(struct task_struct *k)
__kthread_unpark(k, kthread);
wake_up_process(k);
wait_for_completion(&kthread->exited);
+ put_task_stack(k);
}
ret = k->exit_code;
put_task_struct(k);
--
2.5.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-29 18:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-27 5:22 kthread_stop insanity (Re: [[DEBUG] force] 2642458962: BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at ffffc90000997f18) Andy Lutomirski
2016-06-27 5:22 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-06-27 8:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-27 8:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-27 14:54 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-06-27 14:54 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-06-27 15:44 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-06-27 15:44 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-06-27 17:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-06-27 17:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-06-28 18:58 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-06-28 18:58 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-06-28 19:12 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-06-28 19:12 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-06-28 20:12 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-06-28 20:12 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-06-28 20:54 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-06-28 20:54 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-06-28 21:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-06-28 21:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-06-28 21:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-06-28 21:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-06-28 21:21 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-06-28 21:21 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-06-28 21:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-06-28 21:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-06-28 21:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-06-28 21:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-06-28 22:47 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-06-28 22:47 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-06-28 22:59 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-06-28 22:59 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-06-29 15:34 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-06-29 15:34 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-06-29 18:03 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2016-06-29 18:03 ` [PATCH] kthread: to_live_kthread() needs try_get_task_stack() Oleg Nesterov
2016-06-29 18:28 ` kbuild test robot
2016-06-29 18:28 ` kbuild test robot
2016-06-29 18:44 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-06-29 18:44 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-06-29 18:51 ` kbuild test robot
2016-06-29 18:51 ` kbuild test robot
2016-06-29 23:01 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-06-29 23:01 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-06-29 23:33 ` kthread_stop insanity (Re: [[DEBUG] force] 2642458962: BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at ffffc90000997f18) Andy Lutomirski
2016-06-29 23:33 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-06-27 17:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-06-27 17:16 ` Linus Torvalds
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=20160629180357.GA7178@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.