public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"mingo@kernel.org" <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>,
	Michael Shaver <jmshaver@gmail.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Avoid that __wait_on_bit_lock() hangs
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 23:30:06 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160803213006.GA11712@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <11007730-3fa5-139a-8091-655743894ae8@sandisk.com>

Hi Bart,

I too can't understand the problem. Perhaps you missed the fact that
abort_exclusive_wait() does everything under wait_queue_head_t->lock ?

On 08/03, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>
> try_to_wake_up() locks task_struct.pi_lock but abort_exclusive_wait() not.
> My assumption is that the following sequence of events leads to the lockup
> that I had mentioned in the description of my patch:
> * try_to_wake_up() is called for the task that will execute
>   abort_exclusive_wait().
> * After try_to_wake_up() has checked task_struct.state and before
>   autoremove_wake_function() has tried to remove the task from the wait
>   queue, abort_exclusive_wait() is executed for the same task.

But we do not care if we race with another try_to_wake_up(), or even with
another exclusive wake_up_nr(wq)/whatever unless wq is the same.

And if this wq is the same, then wake_up_nr() will do try_to_wake_up/autoremove
either before or after abort_exclusive_wait(), wake_up_nr() takes the same
wq->lock.

And this means that abort_exclusive_wait() can't be called "After try_to_wake_up()"
and "before autoremove_wake_function()".

Oleg.

  reply	other threads:[~2016-08-03 21:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-08-03 16:35 [PATCH] sched: Avoid that __wait_on_bit_lock() hangs Bart Van Assche
2016-08-03 18:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-03 18:56   ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-03 21:30     ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2016-08-03 21:51       ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-04 14:09         ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-04 14:31           ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-05 17:41           ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-08 10:22             ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-08 14:38               ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-08 16:20                 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-08 18:31                   ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-09 17:14                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-09 18:48                       ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-09 23:10                         ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-10 10:45                         ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-10 16:01                           ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-10 16:27                             ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-10 19:58                           ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-11 17:36                             ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-12 16:16                               ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-12 16:27                                 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-12 22:47                                 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-13 16:32                                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-15 23:39                                     ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-16 13:06                                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-16 16:54                                         ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-17 17:30                                           ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-13 17:07                                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-09 23:56                   ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-10 10:57                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-10 11:03                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-04  0:05       ` Bart Van Assche

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=20160803213006.GA11712@redhat.com \
    --to=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bart.vanassche@sandisk.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=jmshaver@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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