From: Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com (Vineet Gupta)
To: linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Interesting csd deadlock on ARC
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 10:51:42 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56CBEC66.2030401@synopsys.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56C6BA82.1060909@synopsys.com>
On Friday 19 February 2016 12:17 PM, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> I've been debugging a csd_lock_wait() deadlock on SMP+PREEMPT ARC HS38x2 and it
> turned out to be lot more interesting than I'd hoped for. This is stock v4.4
>
> Trouble starts with an IPI to self which doesn't get delivered as the inter-core
> interrupt providing h/w is not capable of IPI to self (which I found as part of
> debugging this). Subsequent IPIs from other cores to this core get elided as well
> due to the IPI coalescing optimization in arch/arc/kernel/smp.c: ipi_send_msg_one()
>
> There are ways to use a different h/w mechanism to solve the trigger issue and I'd
> hoped to just implement arch_irq_work_raise(). But the trouble is the call stack
> for this issue: IPI to self is triggered from
>
> sys_sched_setscheduler
> __balance_callback
> pull_rt_task
> irq_work_queue_on <-- called with @cpu == self
>
> Looking into irq_work.c, irq_work_queue() is what is semantically needed,
> specifically arch_irq_work_raise() will not be called, which means I need
> arch_send_call_function_single_ipi() to be able to IPI to self cpu also. Is that
> expected from arch code....
What I actually meant was is it OK for irq_work_queue_on() to be called locally
(is this a sched bug/optimization(. Further if it is OK to be called, does it need
to do behave more like irq_work_queue() i.e. call arch_irq_work_raise() or
arch_send_call_function_single_ipi() is expected to handle sending IPI to self !
>
> Just wanted to understand before writing patches...
>
> Test case triggering is harmless looking LTP: trace_sched -c 1
> It is kind of scheduler fizzer as it triggers a whole bunch of sched activity.
>
> Thx,
> -Vineet
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-23 5:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-19 6:47 Interesting csd deadlock on ARC Vineet Gupta
2016-02-23 5:21 ` Vineet Gupta [this message]
2016-02-23 9:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-02-23 10:21 ` Vineet Gupta
2016-02-23 10:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-02-23 10:58 ` Noam Camus
2016-02-24 4:45 ` Vineet Gupta
2016-02-24 4:51 ` Vineet Gupta
2016-02-25 14:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-02-25 14:23 ` Vineet Gupta
2016-02-25 14:30 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-02-25 15:58 ` Vineet Gupta
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=56CBEC66.2030401@synopsys.com \
--to=vineet.gupta1@synopsys.com \
--cc=linux-snps-arc@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).