From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Ivo Sieben <meltedpianoman@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [REPOST-v2] sched: Prevent wakeup to enter critical section needlessly
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 14:58:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121121135849.GA21030@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMSQXEGfQE_vcvk9MvP-aJD2jeF7vU+84yx_fEn==v2Jve9w0A@mail.gmail.com>
On 11/21, Ivo Sieben wrote:
> Hi
>
> 2012/11/19 Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>:
> >
> > Because on a second thought I suspect this change is wrong.
> >
> > Just for example, please look at kauditd_thread(). It does
> >
> > set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> >
> > add_wait_queue(&kauditd_wait, &wait);
> >
> > if (!CONDITION) // <-- LOAD
> > schedule();
> >
> > And the last LOAD can leak into the critical section protected by
> > wait_queue_head_t->lock, and it can be reordered with list_add()
> > inside this critical section. In this case we can race with wake_up()
> > unless it takes the same lock.
> >
> > Oleg.
> >
>
> I agree that I should solve my problem using the waitqueue_active()
> function locally. I'll abandon this patch and fix it in the
> tty_ldisc.c.
>
> But we try to understand your fault scenario: How can the LOAD leak
> into the critical section? As far as we understand the spin_unlock()
> function also contains a memory barrier
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Not really, in general unlock is a one-way barrier.
> to prevent such a reordering
> from happening.
Please look at the comment above prepare_to_wait(), for example. Or
look at wmb() in try_to_wake_up().
I guess this is not possible on x86, but in general
X;
LOCK();
UNLOCK();
Y;
can be reordered as
LOCK();
Y;
X;
UNLOCK();
UNLOCK + LOCK is the full memory barrier.
Oleg.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-11-21 13:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-24 13:06 [PATCH] RFC: sched: Prevent wakeup to enter critical section needlessly Ivo Sieben
2012-10-09 11:30 ` [REPOST] " Ivo Sieben
2012-10-09 13:37 ` Andi Kleen
2012-10-09 14:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-10-09 15:17 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-10-10 14:02 ` Andi Kleen
2012-10-18 8:30 ` [PATCH-v2] " Ivo Sieben
2012-10-25 10:12 ` [REPOST-v2] " Ivo Sieben
2012-11-19 7:30 ` Ivo Sieben
2012-11-19 10:20 ` Preeti U Murthy
2012-11-19 15:10 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-11-19 15:34 ` Ivo Sieben
2012-11-19 15:49 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-11-21 13:03 ` Ivo Sieben
2012-11-21 13:47 ` Alan Cox
2012-11-21 13:58 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
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=20121121135849.GA21030@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=alan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-serial@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=meltedpianoman@gmail.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@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).