From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: "Aneesh Kumar" <aneesh.kumar@gmail.com>
Cc: "Pavel Machek" <pavel@ucw.cz>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, ego@in.ibm.com, akpm@osdl.org,
mingo@elte.hu, vatsa@in.ibm.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com, "Oleg Nesterov" <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] Freezer: Fix vfork problem
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 20:17:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200702252017.22077.rjw@sisk.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cc723f590702250740t1fec263cq5378027527c3d9f8@mail.gmail.com>
On Sunday, 25 February 2007 16:40, Aneesh Kumar wrote:
> On 2/25/07, Aneesh Kumar <aneesh.kumar@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 2/25/07, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> > > On Sunday, 25 February 2007 15:33, Aneesh Kumar wrote:
> > > > On 2/25/07, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
[--snip--]
>
> Thinking about this i guess we have a problem with the above approach
> i outlined. if we have one task that is waiting on the event and more
> than one that can generate the event then the above logic would not
> work. Also with cases other than vfork; logic of tracking the waiting
> task gets complex. I guess what we have right now is better.
I assume by "righ now" you mean the latest version of my patch. ;-)
Still, having pondered the Pavel's suggestion for a while I think it's doable
without the addtitional process flag. Patch below.
Greetings,
Rafael
include/linux/completion.h | 13 ++++++++++++-
kernel/fork.c | 2 +-
kernel/power/process.c | 20 ++++++--------------
kernel/sched.c | 8 ++++++--
4 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6.20-mm2/include/linux/completion.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.20-mm2.orig/include/linux/completion.h 2007-02-25 14:02:54.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.20-mm2/include/linux/completion.h 2007-02-25 20:20:35.000000000 +0100
@@ -42,7 +42,18 @@ static inline void init_completion(struc
init_waitqueue_head(&x->wait);
}
-extern void FASTCALL(wait_for_completion(struct completion *));
+extern void FASTCALL(__wait_for_completion(struct completion *, int));
+
+static inline void wait_for_completion(struct completion *x)
+{
+ __wait_for_completion(x, 0);
+}
+
+static inline void wait_for_completion_freezable(struct completion *x)
+{
+ __wait_for_completion(x, 1);
+}
+
extern int FASTCALL(wait_for_completion_interruptible(struct completion *x));
extern unsigned long FASTCALL(wait_for_completion_timeout(struct completion *x,
unsigned long timeout));
Index: linux-2.6.20-mm2/kernel/sched.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.20-mm2.orig/kernel/sched.c 2007-02-25 14:02:54.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.20-mm2/kernel/sched.c 2007-02-25 20:20:35.000000000 +0100
@@ -3803,7 +3803,8 @@ void fastcall complete_all(struct comple
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(complete_all);
-void fastcall __sched wait_for_completion(struct completion *x)
+void fastcall __sched
+__wait_for_completion(struct completion *x, int freezable)
{
might_sleep();
@@ -3817,6 +3818,9 @@ void fastcall __sched wait_for_completio
__set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
spin_unlock_irq(&x->wait.lock);
schedule();
+ if (freezable)
+ try_to_freeze();
+
spin_lock_irq(&x->wait.lock);
} while (!x->done);
__remove_wait_queue(&x->wait, &wait);
@@ -3824,7 +3828,7 @@ void fastcall __sched wait_for_completio
x->done--;
spin_unlock_irq(&x->wait.lock);
}
-EXPORT_SYMBOL(wait_for_completion);
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(__wait_for_completion);
unsigned long fastcall __sched
wait_for_completion_timeout(struct completion *x, unsigned long timeout)
Index: linux-2.6.20-mm2/kernel/fork.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.20-mm2.orig/kernel/fork.c 2007-02-25 20:17:25.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.20-mm2/kernel/fork.c 2007-02-25 20:20:35.000000000 +0100
@@ -1393,7 +1393,7 @@ long do_fork(unsigned long clone_flags,
tracehook_report_clone_complete(clone_flags, nr, p);
if (clone_flags & CLONE_VFORK) {
- wait_for_completion(&vfork);
+ wait_for_completion_freezable(&vfork);
tracehook_report_vfork_done(p, nr);
}
} else {
Index: linux-2.6.20-mm2/kernel/power/process.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.20-mm2.orig/kernel/power/process.c 2007-02-25 20:17:25.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.20-mm2/kernel/power/process.c 2007-02-25 20:20:35.000000000 +0100
@@ -48,6 +48,9 @@ void refrigerator(void)
task_unlock(current);
return;
}
+ if (current->vfork_done)
+ wake_up_process(current->parent);
+
save = current->state;
pr_debug("%s entered refrigerator\n", current->comm);
@@ -127,21 +130,10 @@ static unsigned int try_to_freeze_tasks(
cancel_freezing(p);
continue;
}
- if (is_user_space(p)) {
- if (!freeze_user_space)
- continue;
-
- /* Freeze the task unless there is a vfork
- * completion pending
- */
- if (!p->vfork_done)
- freeze_process(p);
- } else {
- if (freeze_user_space)
- continue;
+ if (is_user_space(p) == !freeze_user_space)
+ continue;
- freeze_process(p);
- }
+ freeze_process(p);
todo++;
} while_each_thread(g, p);
read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-25 19:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-02-23 10:16 [RFC][PATCH 0/7] Freezer: Hardening and preparation for CPU hotplug changes Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-23 10:18 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/7] Freezer: Read PF_BORROWED_MM in a nonracy way Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 10:43 ` Pavel Machek
2007-02-23 10:19 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/7] Freezer: Fix memory ordering in refrigerator Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-23 10:21 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/7] Freezer: Close theoretical race between refrigerator and thaw_tasks Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 10:44 ` Pavel Machek
2007-02-23 10:22 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/7] Freezer: Fix vfork problem Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 10:46 ` Pavel Machek
2007-02-25 10:45 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 12:59 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 14:33 ` Aneesh Kumar
2007-02-25 15:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 15:28 ` Aneesh Kumar
2007-02-25 15:40 ` Aneesh Kumar
2007-02-25 19:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2007-02-25 20:31 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-02-25 20:33 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 13:01 ` Aneesh Kumar
2007-02-25 13:43 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-23 10:23 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/7] Freezer: Remove PF_NOFREEZE from rcutorture thread Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 10:44 ` Pavel Machek
2007-02-23 10:25 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/7] Freezer: Remove PF_NOFREEZE from bluetooth threads Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 10:44 ` Pavel Machek
2007-02-25 23:53 ` Marcel Holtmann
2007-02-23 10:26 ` [RFC][PATCH 7/7] Freezer: Add try_to_freeze calls to all kernel threads Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 10:45 ` Pavel Machek
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=200702252017.22077.rjw@sisk.pl \
--to=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@gmail.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=vatsa@in.ibm.com \
--cc=venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.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