public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] sched: Make cond_resched*() available earlier
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2009 00:45:45 +0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090708204545.GA3216@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1247057926.9777.54.camel@twins>

Using early netconsole and gianfar driver this error pops up:

  netconsole: timeout waiting for carrier

It appears that net/core/netpoll.c:netpoll_setup() is using
cond_resched() in a loop waiting for a carrier.

The thing is that cond_resched() is a no-op when system_state !=
SYSTEM_RUNNING, and so drivers/net/phy/phy.c's state_queue is never
scheduled, therefore link detection doesn't work.

The system_state check exists to avoid very early calls to the
scheduler. Though, using cond_resched() should be safe after scheduler
is initialized, so instead of checking the system_state, we can test
that the scheduler is running, therefore making cond_resched() and
friends available much earlier (but not too much).

Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com>
---

On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 02:58:46PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[...]
> > > > Hm. Speaking of cond_resched*() only, then it should be pretty
> > > > safe to convert the SYSTEM_RUNNING checks to scheduler_running,
> > > > no? scheduler_running is set after sched_init().
> > > 
> > > Hmm, that might work, I'd have to audit sched_init_smp() as it seems to
> > > do way too much...
> > 
> > sched_init_smp() is called from the kernel_thread(), so
> > if the scheduler is not functional prior to kernel_thread(),
> > you're in trouble anyway, no? The point is that a lot of
> > code is calling schedule() prior to sched_init_smp()
> > (e.g. msleep(), mutexes), and there are no issues. So
> > should be no issues with cond_resched()?
> 
> Yeah, it should be good, I just got paranoid looking at
> sched_init_smp().

OK, thanks everyone for the reviews.

Here is an updated patch. As usual, tested on UP PowerPC, with and
without SMP, PREEMPT and PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY.

 kernel/sched.c |    6 +++---
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
index 7c9098d..555360b 100644
--- a/kernel/sched.c
+++ b/kernel/sched.c
@@ -6561,7 +6561,7 @@ static void __cond_resched(void)
 int __sched _cond_resched(void)
 {
 	if (need_resched() && !(preempt_count() & PREEMPT_ACTIVE) &&
-					system_state == SYSTEM_RUNNING) {
+					scheduler_running) {
 		__cond_resched();
 		return 1;
 	}
@@ -6579,7 +6579,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(_cond_resched);
  */
 int cond_resched_lock(spinlock_t *lock)
 {
-	int resched = need_resched() && system_state == SYSTEM_RUNNING;
+	int resched = need_resched() && scheduler_running;
 	int ret = 0;
 
 	if (spin_needbreak(lock) || resched) {
@@ -6599,7 +6599,7 @@ int __sched cond_resched_softirq(void)
 {
 	BUG_ON(!in_softirq());
 
-	if (need_resched() && system_state == SYSTEM_RUNNING) {
+	if (need_resched() && scheduler_running) {
 		local_bh_enable();
 		__cond_resched();
 		local_bh_disable();
-- 
1.6.3.3


  reply	other threads:[~2009-07-08 20:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-07-07 23:58 [PATCH/RFC] sched: Remove SYSTEM_RUNNING checks from cond_resched*() Anton Vorontsov
2009-07-08  0:50 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-07-08  6:24   ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-08 12:03     ` Anton Vorontsov
2009-07-08 12:12       ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-08 12:55         ` Anton Vorontsov
2009-07-08 12:58           ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-08 20:45             ` Anton Vorontsov [this message]
2009-07-08 16:12     ` Linus Torvalds
2009-07-08 21:10       ` Andrew Morton
2009-07-08 21:33         ` Anton Vorontsov
2009-07-08 21:47           ` Andrew Morton
2009-07-08 22:20             ` [PATCH] netpoll: Fix carrier detection for drivers that are using phylib Anton Vorontsov
2009-07-09  0:01               ` Linus Torvalds
2009-07-09  3:08                 ` David Miller
2009-07-09  7:56                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-09 12:56                   ` Matt Mackall
2009-07-09 13:26                 ` Matt Mackall
2009-07-09 13:46                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-09 14:18                     ` Matt Mackall
2009-07-09 14:31                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-09 14:43                         ` Matt Mackall
2009-07-09 14:51                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-09 15:06                             ` Matt Mackall
2009-07-09 17:29                         ` Linus Torvalds
2009-07-09 12:52               ` Matt Mackall
2009-07-09 23:20         ` [PATCH/RFC] sched: Remove SYSTEM_RUNNING checks from cond_resched*() 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=20090708204545.GA3216@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru \
    --to=avorontsov@ru.mvista.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --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