public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Prateek Sood <prsood@codeaurora.org>
To: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com
Cc: sramana@codeaurora.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Prateek Sood <prsood@codeaurora.org>
Subject: [PATCH] osq_lock: avoid live-lock issue for RT task
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 19:19:09 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1500040149-27971-1-git-send-email-prsood@codeaurora.org> (raw)

Live Lock  due to task spinning while unqueue of CPU osq_node
from optimistic_spin_queue. Task T1 had decremented mutex count to
acquire the lock on CPU0. Before setting owner it got preempted. On
CPU1 task T2 acquired osq_lock and started spinning on owner of mutex
with preemption disabled. CPU1 runq has one task, so need_resched will
not be set. On CPU0 task T3 tried to acquire osq_lock to spin on the
same mutex. At this time following scenario causes soft lockup:

After preemption of task T1, RT task T3 tried to acquire the same
mutex. It will start spinning on the osq_lock until the lock is available
or need_resched is set. For RT task, need_resched will not be set. Task T3
will not be able to bail out of the infinite loop.

Signed-off-by: Prateek Sood <prsood@codeaurora.org>
---
 kernel/locking/osq_lock.c | 9 ++++++++-
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c b/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
index 05a3785..99b8d99 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 #include <linux/percpu.h>
 #include <linux/sched.h>
 #include <linux/osq_lock.h>
+#include <linux/sched/rt.h>
 
 /*
  * An MCS like lock especially tailored for optimistic spinning for sleeping
@@ -85,6 +86,7 @@ bool osq_lock(struct optimistic_spin_queue *lock)
 {
 	struct optimistic_spin_node *node = this_cpu_ptr(&osq_node);
 	struct optimistic_spin_node *prev, *next;
+	struct task_struct *task = current;
 	int curr = encode_cpu(smp_processor_id());
 	int old;
 
@@ -118,8 +120,13 @@ bool osq_lock(struct optimistic_spin_queue *lock)
 	while (!READ_ONCE(node->locked)) {
 		/*
 		 * If we need to reschedule bail... so we can block.
+		 * If a task spins on owner on a CPU after acquiring
+		 * osq_lock while a RT task spins on another CPU  to
+		 * acquire osq_lock, it will starve the owner from
+		 * completing if owner is to be scheduled on the same CPU.
+		 * It will be a live lock.
 		 */
-		if (need_resched())
+		if (need_resched() || rt_task(task))
 			goto unqueue;
 
 		cpu_relax_lowlatency();
-- 
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc., 
is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

             reply	other threads:[~2017-07-14 13:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-07-14 13:49 Prateek Sood [this message]
2017-07-18 11:36 ` [PATCH] osq_lock: avoid live-lock issue for RT task Peter Zijlstra

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=1500040149-27971-1-git-send-email-prsood@codeaurora.org \
    --to=prsood@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=sramana@codeaurora.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