public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: Buggy IPI and MTRR code on low memory
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 09:55:38 +1030	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200901290955.38940.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0901281029150.25359@gandalf.stny.rr.com>

On Thursday 29 January 2009 03:08:14 Steven Rostedt wrote:
> 
> While developing the RT git tree I came across this deadlock.
> 
> To avoid touching the memory allocator in smp_call_function_many I forced 
> the stack use case, the path that would be taken if data fails to 
> allocate.
> 
> Here's the current code in kernel/smp.c:

Interesting.  I simplified smp_call_function_ma{sk,ny}, and introduced this bug (see 54b11e6d57a10aa9d0009efd93873e17bffd5d30).

We used to wait on OOM, yes, but we didn't do them one at a time.

We could restore that quiesce code, or call a function on all online cpus using on-stack data, and have them atomic_dec a counter when they're done (I'm not sure why we didn't do this in the first place: Nick?)

> The problem is that if we use the stack, then we must wait for the 
> function to finish. But in the mtrr code, the called functions are waiting 
> for the caller to do something after the smp_call_function. Thus we 
> deadlock! This mtrr code seems to have been there for a while. At least 
> longer than the git history.

I don't see how the *ever* worked then, even with the quiesce stuff.

> The patch creates another flag called CSD_FLAG_RELEASE. If we fail
> to alloc the data and the wait bit is not set, we still use the stack
> but we also set this flag instead of the wait flag. The receiving IPI 
> will copy the data locally, and if this flag is set, it will clear it. The 
> caller, after sending the IPI, will wait on this flag to be cleared.

Doesn't this break with more than one cpus?  I think a refcnt is needed for the general case...

Rusty.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-01-28 23:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-01-28 16:38 Buggy IPI and MTRR code on low memory Steven Rostedt
2009-01-28 16:41 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-28 16:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-28 16:56   ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-28 17:00     ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-28 17:24   ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-28 18:20     ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-28 18:52       ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-28 18:22     ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-01-28 18:34       ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-28 21:12 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-28 21:13   ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-28 21:23     ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-28 22:07       ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-28 22:47         ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-28 23:20           ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-28 23:50             ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-28 23:25 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2009-01-28 23:41   ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-29  0:52   ` [PATCH] use per cpu data for single cpu ipi calls Steven Rostedt
2009-01-29  1:30     ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-29  1:56       ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-29  8:49       ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-29 11:13         ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-29 11:41           ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-29 13:42             ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-29 14:07             ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-29 15:08         ` [PATCH -v2] " Steven Rostedt
2009-01-29 15:33           ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-29 16:17             ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-29 17:21           ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-29 17:44             ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-29 17:50               ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-29 18:08               ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-29 18:11                 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-29 18:23                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-29 18:31                   ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-29 18:39                   ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-29 18:44                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-30 11:23                       ` Jens Axboe
2009-01-30 12:32                         ` [PATCH -v3] " Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-30 12:38                           ` Jens Axboe
2009-01-30 12:48                             ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-30 12:55                               ` Jens Axboe
2009-01-30 12:56                                 ` Jens Axboe
2009-01-30 13:00                                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-30 13:02                           ` [PATCH -v4] " Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-30 14:51                             ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-30 16:04                           ` [PATCH -v3] " Linus Torvalds
2009-01-30 16:16                             ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-31  8:44                               ` Jens Axboe
2009-01-29 18:49                 ` [PATCH -v2] " Ingo Molnar
2009-01-30  1:55                 ` Rusty Russell
2009-01-29 17:47             ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-29 17:55               ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-29 18:08                 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-30  1:11           ` 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=200901290955.38940.rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=arjan@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=npiggin@suse.de \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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