From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] swait: add missing barrier to swake_up
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2017 07:34:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170901143401.GR4431@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170901195529.6edca064@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com>
On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 07:55:29PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Sep 2017 11:23:22 +0200
> Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 04:14:50PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> > > swake_up and swake_up_all test the swaitqueue outside the lock,
> > > but they are missing the barrier that would ensure visibility
> > > of a previous store that sets the wakeup condition with the
> > > load that tests the swaitqueue. This could lead to a lost wakeup
> > > if there is memory reordering. Fix this as prescribed by the
> > > waitqueue_active comments.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
> > > --
> > > I noticed this when chasing down that rcu hang bug (which
> > > turned out to not be anything of the sort). I might be missing
> > > something here and it's safe somehow, but if so then it should
> > > have a comment where it diverges from normal waitqueues.
> > >
> > > It looks like there's a few callers which are also testing
> > > swait_active before swake_up without a barrier which look wrong,
> > > so I must be missing something but I'm not sure what.
> >
> > Hi Nicholas. I noticed
> >
> > 35a2897c2a306cca344ca5c0b43416707018f434
> > ("sched/wait: Remove the lockless swait_active() check in swake_up*()")
> >
> > in tip:locking/core.
>
> Oh thanks, I missed that. Should be in 4.14/stable IMO.
This might well have been helpful to me -- I had forgotten about that
fix and am testing without it -- and suffering what look to be lost
timeouts/wakeups. :-/
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-01 14:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-01 6:14 [PATCH] swait: add missing barrier to swake_up Nicholas Piggin
2017-09-01 9:23 ` Andrea Parri
2017-09-01 9:55 ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-09-01 14:34 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2017-09-01 11:16 ` 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=20170901143401.GR4431@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=parri.andrea@gmail.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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