From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755738Ab0LPSto (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Dec 2010 13:49:44 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:24716 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751795Ab0LPStn (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Dec 2010 13:49:43 -0500 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 19:42:29 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Chris Mason , Frank Rowand , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Mike Galbraith , Paul Turner , Jens Axboe , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/5] sched: Reduce ttwu rq->lock contention Message-ID: <20101216184229.GA15889@redhat.com> References: <20101216145602.899838254@chello.nl> <20101216150920.968046926@chello.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101216150920.968046926@chello.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12/16, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > +static int ttwu_force(struct task_struct *p, int wake_flags) > +{ > + struct rq *rq; > + int ret = 0; > + > + /* > + * Since we've already set TASK_WAKING this task's CPU cannot > + * change from under us. I think it can. Yes, we've set TASK_WAKING. But, at least the task itself can change its state back to TASK_RUNNING without calling schedule. Say, __wait_event()-like code. > +static int > +try_to_wake_up(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int state, int wake_flags) > { > - int cpu, orig_cpu, this_cpu, success = 0; > + int cpu = task_cpu(p); > unsigned long flags; > - unsigned long en_flags = ENQUEUE_WAKEUP; > - struct rq *rq; > + int success = 0; > + int load; > > - this_cpu = get_cpu(); > - > - smp_wmb(); > - rq = task_rq_lock(p, &flags); > - if (!(p->state & state)) > - goto out; > + local_irq_save(flags); > + for (;;) { > + unsigned int task_state = p->state; > > - cpu = task_cpu(p); > + if (!(task_state & state)) > + goto out; Well, this surely breaks the code like CONDITION = true; wake_up_process(p); At least we need mb() before we check task_state the first time. Oleg.