public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com>,
	Paul E McKenney <paulmck@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFD] Freezing of kernel threads
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 22:08:22 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200705132208.23254.rjw@sisk.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.0.98.0705130925290.6739@woody.linux-foundation.org>

On Sunday, 13 May 2007 18:33, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 13 May 2007, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
> > 
> > RFC #1: Use get_hot_cpus()- put_hot_cpus() , which follow the
> > well known refcounting model.
> 
> Yes. And usign the "preempt count" as a refcount is fairly natural, no? 
> We do already depend on that in many code-paths.
> 
> It also has the advantage since it's not a *blocking* lock, it's fairly 
> easy to code around (ie since it nests, it avoids the kinds of nasty 
> deadlocks we had with cpufreq that had totally insane calling semantics 
> and different people all wanted the lock).
> 
> Of course, a real nesting lock could be used to the same effect.
> 
> > RFC #1 and #2 DO work. But, the discussions in the thread
> > http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/26/282 gave me the impression
> > that we would be better off without any code audits to
> > make the code paths cpu-hotplug safe. I would leave it for others
> > to shed more light here.
> 
> Well, I hope that _this_ discussion about the freezer has convinced you 
> that there are no more fundamntal problems with #1/#2 than with using the 
> freezer.
> 
> The freezer really needs even *more* code auditing, since it's almost 
> impossible to see which thread depends on some other thread. There's a 
> real reason why most kernel threads disable freezing.

Well, for the current -git we have:

rafael@albercik:~/src/linux-2.6> grep -r -I -l try_to_freeze * \
	| grep -v signal.c | grep -v freezer.h | grep -v process.c | wc
     45      45    1186

Most of these are calls from kernel threads.

At the same time we have:

rafael@albercik:~/src/linux-2.6> grep -r -I -l PF_NOFREEZE * \
	| grep -v sched.h | grep -v process.c | grep -v freezer.h | wc
     23      23     559

I wouldn't call that a majority.  Moreover:

rafael@albercik:~/src/linux-2.6> grep -r -I -l PF_NOFREEZE drivers/* | wc
      9       9     238
rafael@albercik:~/src/linux-2.6> grep -r -I -l try_to_freeze drivers/* | wc
     27      27     790

That, BTW, is why I was (and I still am) afraid to stop freezing kernel threads
just like that.

Of course it's possible to look at these 45 files and see if the kernel threads
in there really need to be freezable and I'm going to do this, but this is a
different thing.

Besides, the problems with interdependencies that we've had recently are
related specifically to the CPU hotplug.  To be precise, they are related to the
CPU hotplug notifiers that try to stop kernel threads which may be frozen.
The other interdependencies don't lead to freezer-related problems.

Greetings,
Rafael

  reply	other threads:[~2007-05-13 20:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-05-12 18:17 [RFD] Freezing of kernel threads Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-12 18:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-12 21:14   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-12 19:17 ` Pavel Machek
2007-05-12 19:40   ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-12 22:14     ` Pavel Machek
2007-05-12 22:08   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-12 19:36 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-05-12 19:57   ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-12 20:11     ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-13  8:33     ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-05-13 16:33       ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-13 20:08         ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2007-05-13 20:49           ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-13 21:14             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-14  6:18         ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2007-05-14  7:26           ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-05-14 10:07             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-14  7:41           ` Dipankar Sarma

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=200705132208.23254.rjw@sisk.pl \
    --to=rjw@sisk.pl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --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@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=vatsa@in.ibm.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