From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Andrey Grodzovsky <Andrey.Grodzovsky@amd.com>
Cc: "Michel Dänzer" <michel@daenzer.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, David.Panariti@amd.com,
oleg@redhat.com, Alexander.Deucher@amd.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, Christian.Koenig@amd.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] drm/scheduler: Don't call wait_event_killable for signaled process.
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 16:21:07 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87tvs05mik.fsf@xmission.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aa2d8587-651e-2c24-a673-4682e7035a8f@amd.com> (Andrey Grodzovsky's message of "Tue, 24 Apr 2018 17:02:40 -0400")
Andrey Grodzovsky <Andrey.Grodzovsky@amd.com> writes:
> On 04/24/2018 03:44 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 05:46:52PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>>> Adding the dri-devel list, since this is driver independent code.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2018-04-24 05:30 PM, Andrey Grodzovsky wrote:
>>>> Avoid calling wait_event_killable when you are possibly being called
>>>> from get_signal routine since in that case you end up in a deadlock
>>>> where you are alreay blocked in singla processing any trying to wait
>>> Multiple typos here, "[...] already blocked in signal processing and [...]"?
>>>
>>>
>>>> on a new signal.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrey Grodzovsky <andrey.grodzovsky@amd.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/gpu_scheduler.c | 5 +++--
>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/gpu_scheduler.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/gpu_scheduler.c
>>>> index 088ff2b..09fd258 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/gpu_scheduler.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/gpu_scheduler.c
>>>> @@ -227,9 +227,10 @@ void drm_sched_entity_do_release(struct drm_gpu_scheduler *sched,
>>>> return;
>>>> /**
>>>> * The client will not queue more IBs during this fini, consume existing
>>>> - * queued IBs or discard them on SIGKILL
>>>> + * queued IBs or discard them when in death signal state since
>>>> + * wait_event_killable can't receive signals in that state.
>>>> */
>>>> - if ((current->flags & PF_SIGNALED) && current->exit_code == SIGKILL)
>>>> + if (current->flags & PF_SIGNALED)
>> You want fatal_signal_pending() here, instead of inventing your own broken
>> version.
>
> I rely on current->flags & PF_SIGNALED because this being set from
> within get_signal,
It doesn't mean that. Unless you are called by do_coredump (you
aren't). The closing of files does not happen in do_coredump.
Which means you are being called from do_exit.
In fact you are being called after exit_files which closes
the files. The actual __fput processing happens in task_work_run.
> meaning I am within signal processing in which case I want to avoid
> any signal based wait for that task,
> From what i see in the code, task_struct.pending.signal is being set
> for other threads in same
> group (zap_other_threads) or for other scenarios, those task are still
> able to receive signals
> so calling wait_event_killable there will not have problem.
Excpet that you are geing called after from do_exit and after exit_files
which is after exit_signal. Which means that PF_EXITING has been set.
Which implies that the kernel signal handling machinery has already
started being torn down.
Not as much as I would like to happen at that point as we are still
left with some old CLONE_PTHREAD messes in the code that need to be
cleaned up.
Still given the fact you are task_work_run it is quite possible even
release_task has been run on that task before the f_op->release method
is called. So you simply can not count on signals working.
Which in practice leaves a timeout for ending your wait. That code can
legitimately be in a context that is neither interruptible nor killable.
>>>> entity->fini_status = -ERESTARTSYS;
>>>> else
>>>> entity->fini_status = wait_event_killable(sched->job_scheduled,
>> But really this smells like a bug in wait_event_killable, since
>> wait_event_interruptible does not suffer from the same bug. It will return
>> immediately when there's a signal pending.
>
> Even when wait_event_interruptible is called as following -
> ...->do_signal->get_signal->....->wait_event_interruptible ?
> I haven't tried it but wait_event_interruptible is very much alike to
> wait_event_killable so I would assume it will also
> not be interrupted if called like that. (Will give it a try just out
> of curiosity anyway)
As PF_EXITING is set want_signal should fail and the signal state of the
task should not be updatable by signals.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-24 21:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1524583836-12130-1-git-send-email-andrey.grodzovsky@amd.com>
[not found] ` <1524583836-12130-3-git-send-email-andrey.grodzovsky@amd.com>
2018-04-24 15:46 ` [PATCH 2/3] drm/scheduler: Don't call wait_event_killable for signaled process Michel Dänzer
[not found] ` <7313704c-0693-0bb9-8818-99cd2b7c0ca0-otUistvHUpPR7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org>
2018-04-24 15:51 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2018-04-24 19:44 ` Daniel Vetter
2018-04-24 21:00 ` Eric W. Biederman
[not found] ` <20180424194418.GE25142-dv86pmgwkMBes7Z6vYuT8azUEOm+Xw19@public.gmane.org>
2018-04-24 21:02 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2018-04-24 21:21 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
[not found] ` <87tvs05mik.fsf-aS9lmoZGLiVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
2018-04-24 21:37 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2018-04-24 22:11 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-04-25 7:14 ` Daniel Vetter
2018-04-25 13:08 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2018-04-25 15:29 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-04-25 16:13 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2018-04-25 16:31 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-04-24 21:40 ` Daniel Vetter
2018-04-25 13:22 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-04-25 13:36 ` Daniel Vetter
2018-04-25 14:18 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-04-25 13:43 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2018-04-24 15:52 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
[not found] <87muxsbmkp.fsf@xmission.com>
[not found] ` <8840ac96-50c4-f94d-eb7c-f007940163f3@amd.com>
[not found] ` <877eowa5qh.fsf@xmission.com>
[not found] ` <20180425135552.GD7592@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <f45c7017-c75a-7f0c-b6d5-4d79600cdd33@amd.com>
[not found] ` <20180425171757.GA10441@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <c39cb438-1e8a-4f2c-50f6-c6e2a144487b@amd.com>
[not found] ` <874ljyu98e.fsf@xmission.com>
[not found] ` <c3c9787d-b279-8169-43d1-74eeb666ffbd@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <bceb1a1b-c453-782d-5a7d-40fa2f22c813@amd.com>
[not found] ` <20180430160006.GB10583@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <e5b0221d-84ba-10ff-4a58-4fa27c99650f@amd.com>
[not found] ` <bb224134-7ccb-cc87-9a71-3ef1743eb074@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <79b2ce10-2cd7-b6f2-551e-0b4ae21072af@amd.com>
[not found] ` <28de0150-0a31-f51a-4f56-0a71f741e07e@amd.com>
2018-05-17 11:18 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2018-05-17 14:48 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-05-17 15:33 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2018-05-17 15:52 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-05-17 19:05 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2018-05-18 8:46 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-05-18 9:42 ` Christian König
2018-05-18 14:44 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-05-18 14:50 ` Christian König
2018-05-18 15:02 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2018-05-22 12:58 ` Christian König
2018-05-22 15:49 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2018-05-22 16:09 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-05-22 16:30 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
2018-05-22 16:33 ` Michel Dänzer
2018-05-22 16:37 ` Andrey Grodzovsky
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=87tvs05mik.fsf@xmission.com \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=Alexander.Deucher@amd.com \
--cc=Andrey.Grodzovsky@amd.com \
--cc=Christian.Koenig@amd.com \
--cc=David.Panariti@amd.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michel@daenzer.net \
--cc=oleg@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox