From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers-scC8bbJcJLCw5LPnMra/2Q@public.gmane.org>
To: "Pallipadi,
Venkatesh"
<venkatesh.pallipadi-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Dave Jones <davej-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
"linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org"
<linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
"cpufreq-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org"
<cpufreq-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
"kernel-testers-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org"
<kernel-testers-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo-X9Un+BFzKDI@public.gmane.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw-KKrjLPT3xs0@public.gmane.org>,
Dave Young
<hidave.darkstar-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg-bbCR+/B0CizivPeTLB3BmA@public.gmane.org>,
Thomas Renninger <trenn-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/3] cpufreq: Define dbs_mutex purpose and cleanup its usage
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 17:32:19 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090625213219.GA27311@Krystal> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1245963285.4534.20542.camel-bi+AKbBUZKY6gyzm1THtWbp2dZbC/Bob@public.gmane.org>
* Pallipadi, Venkatesh (venkatesh.pallipadi-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org) wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 12:46 -0700, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > * venkatesh.pallipadi-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org (venkatesh.pallipadi-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org) wrote:
> > > Commit b14893a62c73af0eca414cfed505b8c09efc613c although it was very
> > > much needed to cleanup ondemand timer cleanly, openup a can of worms
> > > related to locking dependencies in cpufreq.
> > >
> > > Patch here defines the need for dbs_mutex and cleans up its usage in
> > > ondemand governor. This also resolves the lockdep warnings reported here
> > >
> > > http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0906.1/01925.html
> > >
>
> > > @@ -598,14 +593,16 @@ static int cpufreq_governor_dbs(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> > > max(min_sampling_rate,
> > > latency * LATENCY_MULTIPLIER);
> > > }
> > > + mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > > +
> > > dbs_timer_init(this_dbs_info);
> > >
> > > - mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > > break;
> > >
> > > case CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP:
> > > - mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
> > > dbs_timer_exit(this_dbs_info);
> >
> > Hrm, so.. how do we protect against concurrent :
> >
> > CPUFREQ_GOV_START/CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP now ?
>
> concurrent _START _STOP across CPUs does not matter for timer_init and
> timer_exit.
Given those are per-cpu anyway I guess. Hopefully it works OK with CPU
hotplug.
> On same CPU, there cannot be two concurrent _START as upper
> level cpufreq will have policy_rwsem in write mode.
Agreed.
> I cannot think of a
> flow where _START and _STOP on same CPU is possible.
>
_STOP is not protected by any mutex now. So it could be preempted, and
then a _START executed, and there is your race.
> However two concurrent _STOP for same CPU is still possible, as we are
> releasing the rwsem lock before STOP callback. "Back to drawing board"
> time to figure this all out..
I fear that it is indeed the case. If you can come up with a document
explaining the expected interactions between :
- cpu hotplug
- policy lock
- cpufreq driver lock
- timer lock
that would be awesome. :)
Mathieu
>
> Thanks,
> Venki
>
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-25 21:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-25 18:33 [patch 0/3] Take care of cpufreq lockdep issues venkatesh.pallipadi-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w
2009-06-25 18:33 ` [patch 1/3] cpufreq: remove rwsem lock from CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP call (second call site) venkatesh.pallipadi-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w
2009-06-25 18:33 ` [patch 2/3] cpufreq: Define dbs_mutex purpose and cleanup its usage venkatesh.pallipadi-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w
[not found] ` <20090625183601.493904000-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
2009-06-25 19:46 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-06-25 20:54 ` Pallipadi, Venkatesh
[not found] ` <1245963285.4534.20542.camel-bi+AKbBUZKY6gyzm1THtWbp2dZbC/Bob@public.gmane.org>
2009-06-25 21:32 ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2009-06-25 18:33 ` [patch 3/3] cpufreq: Define dbs_mutex purpose and cleanup its usage conservative gov venkatesh.pallipadi-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w
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=20090625213219.GA27311@Krystal \
--to=mathieu.desnoyers-scc8bbjcjlcw5lpnmra/2q@public.gmane.org \
--cc=cpufreq-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=davej-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=hidave.darkstar-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=kernel-testers-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=mingo-X9Un+BFzKDI@public.gmane.org \
--cc=penberg-bbCR+/B0CizivPeTLB3BmA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=rjw-KKrjLPT3xs0@public.gmane.org \
--cc=trenn-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org \
--cc=venkatesh.pallipadi-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).