From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Ed Tomlinson <edt@aei.ca>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 08:29:38 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110718152938.GC2312@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1310981384.13765.40.camel@twins>
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:29:44AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-07-16 at 15:42 -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
> > [39066.195274] -> #2 (rcu_node_level_0){..-.-.}:
> > [39066.195274] [<ffffffff8108b805>] lock_acquire+0x95/0x140
> > [39066.195274] [<ffffffff815780fb>] _raw_spin_lock+0x3b/0x50
> > [39066.195274] [<ffffffff810ba7bf>] __rcu_read_unlock+0x19f/0x2d0
> > [39066.195274] [<ffffffff8103ffc8>] cpuacct_charge+0xc8/0xe0
> > [39066.195274] [<ffffffff81040ee5>] update_curr+0x1a5/0x210
> > [39066.195274] [<ffffffff81043f8a>] enqueue_task_fair+0x7a/0x650
> > [39066.195274] [<ffffffff81035369>] enqueue_task+0x79/0x90
> > [39066.195274] [<ffffffff810353ad>] activate_task+0x2d/0x40
> > [39066.195274] [<ffffffff81036921>] ttwu_activate+0x21/0x50
> > [39066.195274] [<ffffffff810424cc>] T.2447+0x3c/0x60
> > [39066.195274] [<ffffffff81042534>] sched_ttwu_pending+0x44/0x60
> > [39066.195274] [<ffffffff8104255e>] scheduler_ipi+0xe/0x10
> > [39066.195274] [<ffffffff8101e6aa>] smp_reschedule_interrupt+0x2a/0x30
>
> To go on top of my other patch
>
>
> ---
> Subject: sched: Add irq_{enter,exit}() to scheduler_ipi()
>
> Ensure scheduler_ipi() calls irq_{enter,exit} when it does some actual
> work. Traditionally we never did any actual work from the resched IPI
> and all magic happened in the return from interrupt path.
>
> Now that we do do some work, we need to ensure irq_{enter,exit} are
> called so that we don't confuse things.
>
> This affects things like timekeeping, NO_HZ and RCU, basically
> everything with a hook in irq_enter/exit.
>
> Explicit examples of things going wrong are:
>
> sched_clock_cpu() -- has a callback when leaving NO_HZ state to take
> a new reading from GTOD and TSC. Without this
> callback, time is stuck in the past.
>
> RCU -- needs in_irq() to work in order to avoid some nasty deadlocks
Cool -- avoids the extra overhead in the nothing-special-to-do case,
but gets the needed protection otherwise.
Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
> ---
> kernel/sched.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> 1 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
> index 8fb4245..eb9cbe7 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched.c
> @@ -2544,13 +2544,9 @@ static int ttwu_remote(struct task_struct *p, int wake_flags)
> }
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> -static void sched_ttwu_pending(void)
> +static void sched_ttwu_do_pending(struct task_struct *list)
> {
> struct rq *rq = this_rq();
> - struct task_struct *list = xchg(&rq->wake_list, NULL);
> -
> - if (!list)
> - return;
>
> raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock);
>
> @@ -2563,9 +2559,41 @@ static void sched_ttwu_pending(void)
> raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock);
> }
>
> +static void sched_ttwu_pending(void)
> +{
> + struct rq *rq = this_rq();
> + struct task_struct *list = xchg(&rq->wake_list, NULL);
> +
> + if (!list)
> + return;
> +
> + sched_ttwu_do_pending(list);
> +}
> +
> void scheduler_ipi(void)
> {
> - sched_ttwu_pending();
> + struct rq *rq = this_rq();
> + struct task_struct *list = xchg(&rq->wake_list, NULL);
> +
> + if (!list)
> + return;
> +
> + /*
> + * Not all reschedule IPI handlers call irq_enter/irq_exit, since
> + * traditionally all their work was done from the interrupt return
> + * path. Now that we actually do some work, we need to make sure
> + * we do call them.
> + *
> + * Some archs already do call them, luckily irq_enter/exit nest
> + * properly.
> + *
> + * Arguably we should visit all archs and update all handlers,
> + * however a fair share of IPIs are still resched only so this would
> + * somewhat pessimize the simple resched case.
> + */
> + irq_enter();
> + sched_ttwu_do_pending(list);
> + irq_exit();
> }
>
> static void ttwu_queue_remote(struct task_struct *p, int cpu)
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-18 15:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-14 14:49 INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected Sergey Senozhatsky
2011-07-14 16:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-07-14 16:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-14 19:16 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2011-07-14 19:15 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2011-07-14 19:34 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-14 19:38 ` Dave Jones
2011-07-14 20:33 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-14 19:38 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2011-07-14 16:58 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-14 17:02 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-14 17:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-14 17:32 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-14 17:46 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-14 19:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-14 19:41 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-14 20:33 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-15 11:05 ` Ed Tomlinson
2011-07-15 11:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-07-15 11:35 ` Ed Tomlinson
2011-07-15 11:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-07-15 18:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-15 12:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-15 13:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-07-15 14:36 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-15 15:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-07-15 15:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-15 16:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-07-15 16:56 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-15 21:48 ` Ed Tomlinson
2011-07-15 22:04 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-16 19:42 ` Ed Tomlinson
2011-07-17 0:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-17 1:56 ` Ed Tomlinson
2011-07-17 14:28 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-18 15:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-18 9:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-07-18 15:29 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2011-07-15 16:55 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-15 17:03 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-15 17:16 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-15 17:24 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-15 17:42 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-07-15 18:33 ` Paul E. McKenney
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-08-07 16:22 Justin P. Mattock
2011-08-11 20:57 ` Justin P. Mattock
2009-12-06 10:11 Richard Zidlicky
2009-10-10 23:09 John Kacur
2007-02-08 15:03 Pedro M. López
2006-10-16 14:05 alpha @ steudten Engineering
2006-10-16 14:32 ` Nick Piggin
2006-10-16 15:42 ` Randy Dunlap
2006-10-16 15:46 ` Nick Piggin
2006-10-19 6:02 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-19 6:30 ` Nick Piggin
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=20110718152938.GC2312@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=edt@aei.ca \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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