From: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, travis@sgi.com,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: do_boot_cpu can deadlock?
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 15:23:36 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081024095336.GA17679@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081024093342.GA4583@redhat.com>
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 11:33:42AM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 10/23, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> >
> > [Gautham R Shenoy - Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 11:51:19PM +0530]
> > | On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 07:02:12PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > | > Hmm. arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c:do_boot_cpu() can deadlock ?
> > | >
> > | > It is called from _cpu_up() under cpu_hotplug_begin(), and it
> > | > waits for c_idle.work. Again, if we have the pending work which
> > | > needs get_online_cpus() we seem to have problems.
> > |
> > | Good point. Though this code gets triggered mostly during boot time when
> > | the CPUs are being brought online for the first time. If we have some
> > | work-item pending at that time, which needs get_online_cpus(), we could
> > | possibly see this deadlock.
> > |
> > | >
> > | > Oleg.
> > |
> > | --
> > | Thanks and Regards
> > | gautham
> > |
> >
> > May I ask? If I understand right we do use this part of do_boot_cpu
> >
> > if (!keventd_up() || current_is_keventd())
> > c_idle.work.func(&c_idle.work);
> > else {
> > schedule_work(&c_idle.work);
> > wait_for_completion(&c_idle.done);
> > }
> >
> > if only we've been called the first time after power on. And all
> > subsequent call of this do_boot_cpu would lead to
> >
> > if (c_idle.idle) {
> > c_idle.idle->thread.sp = (unsigned long) (((struct pt_regs *)
> > (THREAD_SIZE + task_stack_page(c_idle.idle))) - 1);
> > init_idle(c_idle.idle, cpu);
> > goto do_rest;
> > }
> >
> > ie go to do_rest and no wait_for_completion/schedule_work at all.
> > Did I miss something? *Sorry* in advance if the question is quite
> > not related. This work-pending situation is in 'possible' scenario
> > only (ie we don't have such a callers for now... yet)?
>
> There are no problems during boot time, afaics.
>
> kernel_init() calls smp_init() before do_basic_setup()->init_workqueues().
> This means that do_boot_cpu() won't use workqueues due to !keventd_up().
>
> But let's suppose we boot with maxcpus=1, and then bring up another CPU.
> Or we really add the new physical CPU (I don't really know if this is
> possible on x86).
Even I am not sure if physical hotplug is possible.
But think about the virtualization case when we want to add
additional CPU to a KVM guest at runtime? This
is not such a rare use-case. It could dead-lock that time, No?
>
> Oleg.
--
Thanks and Regards
gautham
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-24 9:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-23 16:55 [PATCH 1/7] work_on_cpu: helper for doing task on a CPU Rusty Russell
2008-10-23 7:22 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2008-10-23 9:40 ` Oleg Nesterov
2008-10-23 14:36 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2008-10-23 16:35 ` Oleg Nesterov
2008-10-23 17:02 ` do_boot_cpu can deadlock? Oleg Nesterov
2008-10-23 18:21 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2008-10-23 18:49 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-10-24 9:33 ` Oleg Nesterov
2008-10-24 9:53 ` Gautham R Shenoy [this message]
2008-10-24 10:51 ` Oleg Nesterov
2008-10-24 3:04 ` [PATCH 1/7] work_on_cpu: helper for doing task on a CPU Rusty Russell
2008-10-24 7:21 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2008-10-24 10:29 ` Oleg Nesterov
2008-10-24 11:18 ` Rusty Russell
2008-10-24 11:40 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2008-10-24 13:25 ` Oleg Nesterov
2008-10-24 13:41 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2008-10-24 14:23 ` Oleg Nesterov
2008-10-23 15:10 ` Rusty Russell
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=20081024095336.GA17679@in.ibm.com \
--to=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=travis@sgi.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