From: psodagud@codeaurora.org (Sodagudi Prasad)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: livelock with hrtimer cpu_base->lock
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 05:55:28 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <63fae7b2ef8dc4cc67928329cf7fcb60@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181010164919.GA16512@arm.com>
On 2018-10-10 09:49, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi Prasad,
>
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 01:56:14PM -0700, Sodagudi Prasad wrote:
>> This is regarding - thread "try to fix contention between
>> expire_timers and
>> try_to_del_timer_sync".
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/7/28/172
>>
>> I think this live lockup issue was discussed earlier but the final set
>> of
>> changes were not concluded.
>
> Well we basically need a way to pick a value for
> CPU_RELAX_WFE_THRESHOLD.
> Do you have any ideas? It could be determined at runtime if necessary.
>
Hi Will,
Please share what are values need to be tried for
CPU_RELAX_WFE_THRESHOLD.
It would be great if it can be determined from runtime. Please let me
know
if any testing need to be done with dynamic detection patch.
-Thanks, Prasad
>> I would like to check whether you have new updates on this issue or
>> not.
>> This problem is observed with 4.14 .64 stable kernel too.
>> We see this problem 2 times in overnight testing.
>>
>> I have to add the following code to avoid live lock. I am thinking
>> that
>> fixing this at the cpu_relax() level.
>>
>> +++ b/kernel/time/hrtimer.c
>> @@ -52,6 +52,7 @@
>> #include <linux/timer.h>
>> #include <linux/freezer.h>
>> #include <linux/compat.h>
>> +#include <linux/delay.h>
>>
>> #include <linux/uaccess.h>
>>
>> @@ -152,6 +153,7 @@ struct hrtimer_clock_base *lock_hrtimer_base(const
>> struct hrtimer *timer,
>> raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&base->cpu_base->lock, *flags);
>> }
>> cpu_relax();
>> + udelay(1);
>> }
>> }
>>
>> @@ -1067,6 +1069,7 @@ int hrtimer_cancel(struct hrtimer *timer)
>> if (ret >= 0)
>> return ret;
>> cpu_relax();
>> + udelay(1);
>> }
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(hrtimer_cancel);
>
> This is just another bodge and likely to hurt in places where 1us is
> excessive because there isn't contention.
>
> Will
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora
Forum,
Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sodagudi Prasad <psodagud@codeaurora.org>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, robin.murphy@arm.com,
ynorov@caviumnetworks.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: livelock with hrtimer cpu_base->lock
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 05:55:28 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <63fae7b2ef8dc4cc67928329cf7fcb60@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181010164919.GA16512@arm.com>
On 2018-10-10 09:49, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi Prasad,
>
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 01:56:14PM -0700, Sodagudi Prasad wrote:
>> This is regarding - thread "try to fix contention between
>> expire_timers and
>> try_to_del_timer_sync".
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/7/28/172
>>
>> I think this live lockup issue was discussed earlier but the final set
>> of
>> changes were not concluded.
>
> Well we basically need a way to pick a value for
> CPU_RELAX_WFE_THRESHOLD.
> Do you have any ideas? It could be determined at runtime if necessary.
>
Hi Will,
Please share what are values need to be tried for
CPU_RELAX_WFE_THRESHOLD.
It would be great if it can be determined from runtime. Please let me
know
if any testing need to be done with dynamic detection patch.
-Thanks, Prasad
>> I would like to check whether you have new updates on this issue or
>> not.
>> This problem is observed with 4.14 .64 stable kernel too.
>> We see this problem 2 times in overnight testing.
>>
>> I have to add the following code to avoid live lock. I am thinking
>> that
>> fixing this at the cpu_relax() level.
>>
>> +++ b/kernel/time/hrtimer.c
>> @@ -52,6 +52,7 @@
>> #include <linux/timer.h>
>> #include <linux/freezer.h>
>> #include <linux/compat.h>
>> +#include <linux/delay.h>
>>
>> #include <linux/uaccess.h>
>>
>> @@ -152,6 +153,7 @@ struct hrtimer_clock_base *lock_hrtimer_base(const
>> struct hrtimer *timer,
>> raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&base->cpu_base->lock, *flags);
>> }
>> cpu_relax();
>> + udelay(1);
>> }
>> }
>>
>> @@ -1067,6 +1069,7 @@ int hrtimer_cancel(struct hrtimer *timer)
>> if (ret >= 0)
>> return ret;
>> cpu_relax();
>> + udelay(1);
>> }
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(hrtimer_cancel);
>
> This is just another bodge and likely to hurt in places where 1us is
> excessive because there isn't contention.
>
> Will
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora
Forum,
Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-12 12:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-09 20:56 livelock with hrtimer cpu_base->lock Sodagudi Prasad
2018-10-09 20:56 ` Sodagudi Prasad
2018-10-10 16:49 ` Will Deacon
2018-10-10 16:49 ` Will Deacon
2018-10-12 12:55 ` Sodagudi Prasad [this message]
2018-10-12 12:55 ` Sodagudi Prasad
2018-10-12 15:45 ` Will Deacon
2018-10-12 15:45 ` Will Deacon
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=63fae7b2ef8dc4cc67928329cf7fcb60@codeaurora.org \
--to=psodagud@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.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.