From: npiggin@suse.de
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>,
Nadia Derbey <Nadia.Derbey@bull.net>,
Pierre Peiffer <peifferp@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [patch 3/4] ipc: sem preempt improve
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 21:09:05 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090811111607.144736971@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20090811110902.255877673@suse.de
[-- Attachment #1: ipc-sem-preempt-improve.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2573 bytes --]
The strange sysv semaphore wakeup scheme has a kind of busy-wait lock
involved, which could deadlock if preemption is enabled during the
"lock".
It is an implementation detail (due to a spinlock being held) that this
is actually the case. However if "spinlocks" are made preemptible, or if
the sem lock is changed to a sleeping lock for example, then the wakeup
would become buggy. So this might be a bugfix for -rt kernels.
Imagine waker being preempted by wakee and never clearing IN_WAKEUP --
if wakee has higher RT priority then there is a priority inversion deadlock.
Even if there is not a priority inversion to cause a deadlock, then there
is still time wasted spinning.
Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
---
ipc/sem.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6/ipc/sem.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/ipc/sem.c
+++ linux-2.6/ipc/sem.c
@@ -397,6 +397,27 @@ undo:
return result;
}
+/*
+ * Wake up a process waiting on the sem queue with a given error.
+ * The queue is invalid (may not be accessed) after the function returns.
+ */
+static void wake_up_sem_queue(struct sem_queue *q, int error)
+{
+ /*
+ * Hold preempt off so that we don't get preempted and have the
+ * wakee busy-wait until we're scheduled back on. We're holding
+ * locks here so it may not strictly be needed, however if the
+ * locks become preemptible then this prevents such a problem.
+ */
+ preempt_disable();
+ q->status = IN_WAKEUP;
+ wake_up_process(q->sleeper);
+ /* hands-off: q can disappear immediately after writing q->status. */
+ smp_wmb();
+ q->status = error;
+ preempt_enable();
+}
+
/* Go through the pending queue for the indicated semaphore
* looking for tasks that can be completed.
*/
@@ -428,17 +449,7 @@ again:
* continue.
*/
alter = q->alter;
-
- /* wake up the waiting thread */
- q->status = IN_WAKEUP;
-
- wake_up_process(q->sleeper);
- /* hands-off: q will disappear immediately after
- * writing q->status.
- */
- smp_wmb();
- q->status = error;
-
+ wake_up_sem_queue(q, error);
if (alter)
goto again;
}
@@ -522,10 +533,7 @@ static void freeary(struct ipc_namespace
list_for_each_entry_safe(q, tq, &sma->sem_pending, list) {
list_del(&q->list);
- q->status = IN_WAKEUP;
- wake_up_process(q->sleeper); /* doesn't sleep */
- smp_wmb();
- q->status = -EIDRM; /* hands-off q */
+ wake_up_sem_queue(q, -EIDRM);
}
/* Remove the semaphore set from the IDR */
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-11 11:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-11 11:09 [patch 0/4] ipc sem improvements npiggin
2009-08-11 11:09 ` [patch 1/4] ipc: sem optimise undo list search npiggin
2009-08-16 13:17 ` Manfred Spraul
2009-08-11 11:09 ` [patch 2/4] ipc: sem use list operations npiggin
2009-08-16 13:18 ` Manfred Spraul
2009-08-11 11:09 ` npiggin [this message]
2009-08-16 13:20 ` [patch 3/4] ipc: sem preempt improve Manfred Spraul
2009-08-11 11:09 ` [patch 4/4] ipc: sem optimise simple operations npiggin
2009-08-11 18:19 ` Manfred Spraul
2009-08-11 18:23 ` Zach Brown
2009-08-12 4:07 ` Nick Piggin
2009-08-12 18:35 ` Manfred Spraul
2009-08-14 8:58 ` Nick Piggin
2009-08-14 17:53 ` Manfred Spraul
2009-08-11 20:07 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2009-08-12 4:48 ` Nick Piggin
2009-08-12 5:43 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2009-08-14 18:48 ` Manfred Spraul
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=20090811111607.144736971@suse.de \
--to=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=Nadia.Derbey@bull.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=manfred@colorfullife.com \
--cc=peifferp@gmail.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