From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: frank.rowand@am.sony.com
Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 14/18] sched: Remove rq->lock from the first half of ttwu()
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2011 18:16:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1296753411.26581.464.camel@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D4367CA.2030303@am.sony.com>
On Fri, 2011-01-28 at 17:05 -0800, Frank Rowand wrote:
>
> The deadlock can occur if __ARCH_WANT_UNLOCKED_CTXSW and
> __ARCH_WANT_INTERRUPTS_ON_CTXSW are defined.
>
> A task sets p->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE, then calls schedule().
>
> schedule()
> prev->on_rq = 0
> context_switch()
> prepare_task_switch()
> prepare_lock_switch()
> raw_spin_unlock_irq(&rq->lock)
>
> At this point, a pending interrupt (on this same cpu) is handled.
> The interrupt handling results in a call to try_to_wake_up() on the
> current process. The try_to_wake_up() gets into:
>
> while (p->on_cpu)
> cpu_relax();
>
> and spins forever. This is because "prev->on_cpu = 0" slightly
> after this point at:
>
> finish_task_switch()
> finish_lock_switch()
> prev->on_cpu = 0
Right, very good spot!
>
> One possible fix would be to get rid of __ARCH_WANT_INTERRUPTS_ON_CTXSW.
> I don't suspect the reaction to that suggestion will be very positive...
:-), afaik some architectures requires this, ie. removing this would
require dropping whole architectures.
> Another fix might be:
>
> while (p->on_cpu) {
> if (p == current)
> goto out_activate;
> cpu_relax();
> }
>
> Then add back in the out_activate label.
>
> I don't know if the second fix is good -- I haven't thought out how
> it impacts the later patches in the series.
Right, I've done something similar to this, simply short-circuit the cpu
selection to force it to activate the task on the local cpu.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-03 17:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-04 14:59 [RFC][PATCH 00/18] sched: Reduce runqueue lock contention -v4 Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 01/18] sched: Always provide p->on_cpu Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 02/18] mutex: Use p->on_cpu for the adaptive spin Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 03/18] sched: Change the ttwu success details Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 04/18] sched: Clean up ttwu stats Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 05/18] sched: Provide p->on_rq Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-05 8:13 ` Yong Zhang
2011-01-05 9:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-29 0:10 ` Frank Rowand
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 06/18] sched: Serialize p->cpus_allowed and ttwu() using p->pi_lock Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 07/18] sched: Drop the rq argument to sched_class::select_task_rq() Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-06 13:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-06 14:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 08/18] sched: Remove rq argument to sched_class::task_waking() Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 09/18] sched: Delay task_contributes_to_load() Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 10/18] sched: Also serialize ttwu_local() with p->pi_lock Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 11/18] sched: Add p->pi_lock to task_rq_lock() Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-05 18:46 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-01-05 19:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-29 0:21 ` Frank Rowand
2011-02-03 17:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-02-03 17:49 ` Frank Rowand
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 12/18] sched: Drop rq->lock from first part of wake_up_new_task() Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 13/18] sched: Drop rq->lock from sched_exec() Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 14/18] sched: Remove rq->lock from the first half of ttwu() Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-06 16:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-29 1:05 ` Frank Rowand
2011-02-03 17:16 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 15/18] sched: Remove rq argument from ttwu_stat() Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 16/18] sched: Rename ttwu_post_activation Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-29 1:08 ` Frank Rowand
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 17/18] sched: Move the second half of ttwu() to the remote cpu Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-05 21:07 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-01-06 15:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-07 15:22 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-01-18 16:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-19 19:37 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-01-29 0:04 ` Frank Rowand
2011-02-03 17:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 14:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 18/18] sched: Sort hotplug vs ttwu queueing Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-05 20:47 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-01-06 10:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-01-04 15:16 ` [RFC][PATCH 00/18] sched: Reduce runqueue lock contention -v4 Ingo Molnar
2011-01-29 1:20 ` Frank Rowand
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=1296753411.26581.464.camel@laptop \
--to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=frank.rowand@am.sony.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=yong.zhang0@gmail.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