From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: "Kohli, Gaurav" <gkohli@codeaurora.org>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, mpe@ellerman.id.au, mingo@kernel.org,
bigeasy@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@codeaurora.org>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] kthread/smpboot: Serialize kthread parking against wakeup
Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 15:19:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180501131904.GG12217@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <745d762d-9ab3-0749-9b87-9bb03d913071@codeaurora.org>
> On 5/1/2018 5:01 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Let me ponder what the best solution is, it's a bit of a mess.
So there's:
- TASK_PARKED, which we can make a special state; this solves the
problem because then wait_task_inactive() is guaranteed to see
TASK_PARKED and DTRT.
- complete(&kthread->parked), which we can do inside schedule(); this
solves the problem because then kthread_park() will not return early
and the task really is blocked.
and I'm fairly sure I thought of a 3rd way to cure things, but now that
I'm writing things down I cannot seem to remember :/ -- could be we muck
with wait_task_inactive().
In any case, I hate all of them, but I think the completion one is the
least horrible because it gives the strongest guarantees and cleans up
most. But promoting TASK_PARKED to special certainly is the earier
patch.
The below boots, but that's about all I did with it. Opinions?
---
--- a/include/linux/kthread.h
+++ b/include/linux/kthread.h
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ void *kthread_probe_data(struct task_str
int kthread_park(struct task_struct *k);
void kthread_unpark(struct task_struct *k);
void kthread_parkme(void);
+void kthread_park_complete(struct task_struct *k);
int kthreadd(void *unused);
extern struct task_struct *kthreadd_task;
--- a/kernel/kthread.c
+++ b/kernel/kthread.c
@@ -55,7 +55,6 @@ enum KTHREAD_BITS {
KTHREAD_IS_PER_CPU = 0,
KTHREAD_SHOULD_STOP,
KTHREAD_SHOULD_PARK,
- KTHREAD_IS_PARKED,
};
static inline void set_kthread_struct(void *kthread)
@@ -177,14 +176,12 @@ void *kthread_probe_data(struct task_str
static void __kthread_parkme(struct kthread *self)
{
- __set_current_state(TASK_PARKED);
- while (test_bit(KTHREAD_SHOULD_PARK, &self->flags)) {
- if (!test_and_set_bit(KTHREAD_IS_PARKED, &self->flags))
- complete(&self->parked);
+ for (;;) {
+ set_current_state(TASK_PARKED);
+ if (!test_bit(KTHREAD_SHOULD_PARK, &self->flags))
+ break;
schedule();
- __set_current_state(TASK_PARKED);
}
- clear_bit(KTHREAD_IS_PARKED, &self->flags);
__set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
}
@@ -194,6 +191,11 @@ void kthread_parkme(void)
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kthread_parkme);
+void kthread_park_complete(struct task_struct *k)
+{
+ complete(&to_kthread(k)->parked);
+}
+
static int kthread(void *_create)
{
/* Copy data: it's on kthread's stack */
@@ -450,22 +452,15 @@ void kthread_unpark(struct task_struct *
{
struct kthread *kthread = to_kthread(k);
- clear_bit(KTHREAD_SHOULD_PARK, &kthread->flags);
/*
- * We clear the IS_PARKED bit here as we don't wait
- * until the task has left the park code. So if we'd
- * park before that happens we'd see the IS_PARKED bit
- * which might be about to be cleared.
+ * Newly created kthread was parked when the CPU was offline.
+ * The binding was lost and we need to set it again.
*/
- if (test_and_clear_bit(KTHREAD_IS_PARKED, &kthread->flags)) {
- /*
- * Newly created kthread was parked when the CPU was offline.
- * The binding was lost and we need to set it again.
- */
- if (test_bit(KTHREAD_IS_PER_CPU, &kthread->flags))
- __kthread_bind(k, kthread->cpu, TASK_PARKED);
- wake_up_state(k, TASK_PARKED);
- }
+ if (test_bit(KTHREAD_IS_PER_CPU, &kthread->flags))
+ __kthread_bind(k, kthread->cpu, TASK_PARKED);
+
+ clear_bit(KTHREAD_SHOULD_PARK, &kthread->flags);
+ wake_up_state(k, TASK_PARKED);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kthread_unpark);
@@ -488,12 +483,13 @@ int kthread_park(struct task_struct *k)
if (WARN_ON(k->flags & PF_EXITING))
return -ENOSYS;
- if (!test_bit(KTHREAD_IS_PARKED, &kthread->flags)) {
- set_bit(KTHREAD_SHOULD_PARK, &kthread->flags);
- if (k != current) {
- wake_up_process(k);
- wait_for_completion(&kthread->parked);
- }
+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(test_bit(KTHREAD_SHOULD_PARK, &kthread->flags)))
+ return -EBUSY;
+
+ set_bit(KTHREAD_SHOULD_PARK, &kthread->flags);
+ if (k != current) {
+ wake_up_process(k);
+ wait_for_completion(&kthread->parked);
}
return 0;
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -7,6 +7,8 @@
*/
#include "sched.h"
+#include <linux/kthread.h>
+
#include <asm/switch_to.h>
#include <asm/tlb.h>
@@ -2718,20 +2720,28 @@ static struct rq *finish_task_switch(str
membarrier_mm_sync_core_before_usermode(mm);
mmdrop(mm);
}
- if (unlikely(prev_state == TASK_DEAD)) {
- if (prev->sched_class->task_dead)
- prev->sched_class->task_dead(prev);
+ if (unlikely(prev_state & (TASK_DEAD|TASK_PARKED))) {
+ switch (prev_state) {
+ case TASK_DEAD:
+ if (prev->sched_class->task_dead)
+ prev->sched_class->task_dead(prev);
+
+ /*
+ * Remove function-return probe instances associated with this
+ * task and put them back on the free list.
+ */
+ kprobe_flush_task(prev);
- /*
- * Remove function-return probe instances associated with this
- * task and put them back on the free list.
- */
- kprobe_flush_task(prev);
+ /* Task is done with its stack. */
+ put_task_stack(prev);
- /* Task is done with its stack. */
- put_task_stack(prev);
+ put_task_struct(prev);
+ break;
- put_task_struct(prev);
+ case TASK_PARKED:
+ kthread_park_complete(prev);
+ break;
+ }
}
tick_nohz_task_switch();
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-01 13:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-25 8:33 [PATCH v1] kthread/smpboot: Serialize kthread parking against wakeup Gaurav Kohli
2018-04-25 20:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-26 4:04 ` Kohli, Gaurav
2018-04-26 9:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-26 8:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-26 8:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-26 15:53 ` Kohli, Gaurav
2018-04-30 11:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-01 7:50 ` Kohli, Gaurav
2018-05-01 10:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-01 10:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-01 10:40 ` Kohli, Gaurav
2018-05-01 11:31 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-01 11:46 ` Kohli, Gaurav
2018-05-01 13:19 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2018-05-02 5:15 ` Kohli, Gaurav
2018-05-02 8:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-02 10:13 ` Kohli, Gaurav
2018-05-07 11:09 ` Kohli, Gaurav
2018-05-07 11:23 ` Kohli, Gaurav
2018-06-05 11:13 ` Kohli, Gaurav
2018-06-05 15:08 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-06-05 15:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-06-05 15:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-06-05 16:35 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-06-05 18:21 ` Kohli, Gaurav
2018-06-05 20:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-06-06 13:51 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-06-06 15:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-06-06 15:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-06-06 15:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-06-06 18:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-06-07 8:30 ` Kohli, Gaurav
2018-05-01 10:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-26 16:02 ` Andrea Parri
2018-04-26 16:18 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-04-30 11:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-30 11:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-28 6:43 ` [lkp-robot] [kthread/smpboot] cad8e99675: inconsistent{IN-HARDIRQ-W}->{HARDIRQ-ON-W}usage kernel test robot
2018-04-28 6:43 ` kernel test robot
2018-04-28 6:43 ` kernel test robot
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=20180501131904.GG12217@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=gkohli@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=neeraju@codeaurora.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.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.