From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
tglx@linutronix.de, ilya.dryomov@inktank.com,
umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/11] sched: Debug nested sleeps
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 20:35:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141001183549.GA3382@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141001161058.GE2843@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 10/01, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 11:47:32PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > > > This is minor, but this way CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP will not imply
> > > > a subtle behavioural change.
> > >
> > > You mean the __set_current_state() that's extra?
> >
> > Yes, and note that it only does __set_current_state(RUNNING) if
> > CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP. This means that disabling/enabling this
> > option can, silently hide/uncover a bug.
> >
> > > I would actually argue
> > > to keep that since it makes the 'problem' much worse.
> >
> > OK, I won't insist, but could you explain why the suggested change can
> > make the problem (and which problem ;) worse?
>
> Sure, so the trivial problem is not actually going to sleep in the outer
> wait primitive because the inner wait primitive reset ->state to
> TASK_RUNNING.
But this means that fixup_sleep() must not be used?
> So by always setting the ->state to TASK_RUNNING it never goes to sleep
> and it'll revert to spinning,
But I tried to suggest to not set TASK_RUNNING?
Peter, I am sorry for wasting your time, this is really minor, but still
I'd like to understand.
Let me try again. With this series we have
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP
#define fixup_sleep() __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING)
#else
#define fixup_sleep() do { } while (0)
#endif
and this means that we do not need __set_current_state(RUNNING) for
correctness, just we want to shut up the warning in __might_sleep().
This is fine (and the self-documenting helper is nice), but this means
that CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP adds a subtle difference.
For example, let's suppose that we do not have 01/11 which fixes
mutex_lock(). Then this code
set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
...
fixup_sleep();
...
mutex_lock(some_mutex);
can hang, but only if !CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP.
So perhaps it makes sense to redefine it
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP
#define fixup_sleep() (current->task_state_change = 0)
#else
#define fixup_sleep() do { } while (0)
#endif
and change __might_sleep()
- if (WARN(current->state != TASK_RUNNING,
+ if (WARN(current->state != TASK_RUNNING && current->task_state_change != 0,
?
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-01 18:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-24 8:18 [PATCH 00/11] nested sleeps, fixes and debug infrastructure Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-24 8:18 ` [PATCH 01/11] locking/mutex: Dont assume TASK_RUNNING Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-28 11:09 ` [tip:sched/core] locking/mutex: Don't " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-24 8:18 ` [PATCH 02/11] wait: Provide infrastructure to deal with nested blocking Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-29 21:02 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-02 7:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 21:21 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-28 11:09 ` [tip:sched/core] sched/wait: " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-24 8:18 ` [PATCH 03/11] wait: Add might_sleep() Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-28 11:09 ` [tip:sched/core] sched/wait: Add might_sleep() checks tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-24 8:18 ` [PATCH 04/11] exit: Deal with nested sleeps Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-28 11:10 ` [tip:sched/core] sched, " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-24 8:18 ` [PATCH 05/11] inotify: " Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-28 11:10 ` [tip:sched/core] sched, " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-24 8:18 ` [PATCH 06/11] tty: " Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-28 11:10 ` [tip:sched/core] sched, " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-24 8:18 ` [PATCH 07/11] smp: Correctly deal " Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-28 11:11 ` [tip:sched/core] sched, " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-24 8:18 ` [PATCH 08/11] module: Fix nested sleep Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-29 22:18 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-09-30 13:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-28 11:11 ` [tip:sched/core] sched, modules: Fix nested sleep in add_unformed_module() tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-24 8:18 ` [PATCH 09/11] net: Clean up sk_wait_event() vs might_sleep() Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-24 8:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-28 11:11 ` [tip:sched/core] sched, net: Clean up sk_wait_event() vs. might_sleep() tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-24 8:18 ` [PATCH 10/11] sched: Debug nested sleeps Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-29 22:13 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-09-30 13:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-30 21:47 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-01 16:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-01 18:35 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2014-10-02 9:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 21:34 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-28 11:11 ` [tip:sched/core] " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-24 8:18 ` [PATCH 11/11] sched: Exclude cond_resched() from nested sleep test Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-28 11:12 ` [tip:sched/core] " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-25 8:30 ` [PATCH 00/11] nested sleeps, fixes and debug infrastructure Mike Galbraith
2014-09-25 9:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-25 9:10 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-09-25 9:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-25 9:56 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-09-25 13:59 ` BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c:370 Mike Galbraith
2014-09-26 6:24 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-09-26 7:54 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-09-26 14:10 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-09-26 22:44 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-09-27 6:14 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-09-27 19:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-02 10:22 ` [PATCH 00/11] nested sleeps, fixes and debug infrastructure Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 12:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-27 13:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-28 0:07 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-28 8:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-29 0:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-29 9:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-29 11:31 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-29 11:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-29 14:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-11-04 16:08 ` [tip:sched/core] audit, sched/wait: Fixup kauditd_thread() wait loop tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
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=20141001183549.GA3382@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=ilya.dryomov@inktank.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=umgwanakikbuti@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