From: monstr@monstr.eu (Michal Simek)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [BUG] "sched: Remove rq->lock from the first half of ttwu()" locks up on ARM
Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 16:08:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DE4F66D.9040101@monstr.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1306849951.2353.108.camel@twins>
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-05-31 at 15:37 +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
>
>> I briefly looked at it and it probably come from copy_thread function (process.c
>> - line: childregs->msr |= MSR_IE;)
>> When context switch happen, childregs->msr value is loaded to MSR (machine
>> status register) which caused that IE is enabled ( entry.S:~977 lwi r12, r11,
>> CC_MSR; mts rmsr, r12)
>>
>> NOTE: MSR stores flags for IE, i/d-cache ON/OFF, virtual memory/user mode etc.
>>
>> This is no problem if context switch is done with irq on. But maybe there is
>> another place which is causing some problems.
>
> Ahh, no wonder I didn't find that ;-)
:-)
>
>> Where exactly should be IRQ reenable after context switch?
>
> the tail end of finish_lock_switch(), where it does:
> raw_spin_unlock_irq(&rq->lock).
ok - I see.
>
>> I would like to also check some things.
>> 1. When schedule should be called from arch specific code?
>> Currently we are calling schedule after syscall/exception/interrupt happen.
>> Is there any place where schedule should/shouldn't be called?
>
> It should be called on the return to userspace path when
> TIF_NEED_RESCHED is set.
Yes, we do that. (PTO + PT_MODE stores if return is to kernel or user space)
It should not be called from non-preemptible
> contexts like non-zero preempt_count or IRQ-disabled.
Is this even when the return is to userspace?
PREEMPT is not well tested feature but maybe it is right time to do so.
There is only small part of code (ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT) when irq happen and
there is return to the kernel. Is this correct?
>
> [ with the exception of CONFIG_PREEMPT which calls preempt_schedule()
> which checks both those things ]
This is called only when IRQ happen right? We call preempt_schedule_irq because
irq are off and IRQ is ON by rtid below IRQ_return label.
>
>> 2. For syscall and exception handling - interrupt is ON but it is only masked.
>
> I'm having trouble understanding: on but masked.
Interrupt can't happen because some masking bits are setup. If you call
irgs_disabled() or others you will get that IRQ is ON but can't happen.
>
>> When schedule is called from that any code has to enable IRQ if generic code
>> doesn't do that. Not sure if it does.
>
> generic code isn't supposed to call schedule() with IRQs disabled (and
> doesn't afaik)
OK. Which means I have to disable IRQ before schedule is called. Is that correct?
Michal
--
Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng)
w: www.monstr.eu p: +42-0-721842854
Maintainer of Linux kernel 2.6 Microblaze Linux - http://www.monstr.eu/fdt/
Microblaze U-BOOT custodian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-31 14:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-24 18:13 [BUG] "sched: Remove rq->lock from the first half of ttwu()" locks up on ARM Marc Zyngier
2011-05-24 21:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-24 21:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-25 12:23 ` Marc Zyngier
2011-05-25 17:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-25 21:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-26 7:29 ` Yong Zhang
2011-05-26 10:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-26 11:02 ` Marc Zyngier
2011-05-26 11:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-26 12:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-26 12:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-26 12:31 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-05-26 12:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-26 12:50 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-26 13:36 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-05-26 14:45 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-05-27 12:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-27 17:55 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-05-27 19:41 ` Nicolas Pitre
2011-05-27 20:52 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-05-28 13:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-31 11:08 ` Michal Simek
2011-05-31 13:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-31 13:37 ` Michal Simek
2011-05-31 13:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-31 14:08 ` Michal Simek [this message]
2011-05-31 14:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-29 10:21 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-05-29 10:26 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-05-29 12:01 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-05-29 13:19 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-05-29 21:21 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-05-29 9:51 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-06-06 10:29 ` Pavel Machek
2011-05-26 14:56 ` Marc Zyngier
2011-05-26 15:45 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-05-26 15:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-26 16:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-26 16:20 ` Marc Zyngier
2011-05-26 16:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-27 8:01 ` Marc Zyngier
2011-05-26 16:22 ` Marc Zyngier
2011-05-26 17:04 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-05-26 17:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-26 17:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-26 17:49 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-05-27 7:01 ` Yong Zhang
2011-05-27 15:23 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-05-27 15:29 ` Marc Zyngier
2011-05-27 15:30 ` Santosh Shilimkar
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=4DE4F66D.9040101@monstr.eu \
--to=monstr@monstr.eu \
--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 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).