From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Rachel Menge <rachelmenge@linux.microsoft.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rcu@vger.kernel.org,
Wei Fu <fuweid89@gmail.com>,
apais@linux.microsoft.com,
Sudhanva Huruli <Sudhanva.Huruli@microsoft.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
Mike Christie <michael.christie@oracle.com>,
Joel Granados <j.granados@samsung.com>,
Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] zap_pid_ns_processes: clear TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL along with TIF_SIGPENDING
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 17:30:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240613153021.GC18218@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87a5jpqamx.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
On 06/13, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> writes:
>
> > kernel_wait4() doesn't sleep and returns -EINTR if there is no
> > eligible child and signal_pending() is true.
> >
> > That is why zap_pid_ns_processes() clears TIF_SIGPENDING but this is not
> > enough, it should also clear TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL to make signal_pending()
> > return false and avoid a busy-wait loop.
>
> I took a look through the code. It used to be that TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
> was all about waking up a task so that task_work_run can be used.
> io_uring still mostly uses it that way. There is also a use in
> kthread_stop that just uses it as a TIF_SIGPENDING without having a
> pending signal.
>
> At the point in do_exit where exit_notify and thus zap_pid_ns_processes
> is called I can't possibly see a use for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL.
> exit_task_work, exit_signals, and io_uring_cancel have all been called.
>
> So TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL should be spurious at this point and safe to clear.
> Why it remains set is a mystery to me.
because exit_task_work() -> task_work_run() doesn't clear TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL.
So yes, it is spurious, but to me a possible TIF_SIGPENDING is even more
"spurious". See my reply to Wei.
We don't need to clear TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL inside the loop, task_work_addd()
can't succeed after exit_task_work() sets ->task_works =&work_exited, but
this is another story and this doesn't (well, shouldn't) differ from
TIF_SIGPENDING.
> If I had infinite time and energy the ideal is to rework the pid
> namespace exit logic
Perhaps in this case you could take a look at the next loop waiting for
pid_ns->pid_allocated == init_pids ;)
I always hated the fact that the the exiting sub-namespace init can
"hang forever" if this namespace has the tasks injected from the parent
namespace. And I had enough hard-to-debug internal bug reports which
blamed the kernel.
> This active waiting is weird and non-standard in the kernel and winds up
> causeing a problem every couple of years because of that.
Agreed.
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-13 15:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-05 23:42 [RCU] zombie task hung in synchronize_rcu_expedited Rachel Menge
2024-06-06 11:10 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-06-06 15:45 ` Wei Fu
2024-06-06 17:28 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-06-07 3:02 ` Wei Fu
2024-06-07 6:25 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-06-07 15:04 ` Wei Fu
2024-06-07 21:22 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-06-08 12:42 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-06-10 0:07 ` Wei Fu
2024-06-08 12:06 ` [PATCH] zap_pid_ns_processes: clear TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL along with TIF_SIGPENDING Oleg Nesterov
2024-06-08 17:00 ` Boqun Feng
2024-06-09 14:12 ` Wei Fu
2024-06-12 16:57 ` Jens Axboe
2024-06-13 12:40 ` Eric W. Biederman
2024-06-13 14:02 ` Wei Fu
2024-06-13 14:49 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-06-13 15:30 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2024-06-08 15:48 ` [PATCH] zap_pid_ns_processes: don't send SIGKILL to sub-threads Oleg Nesterov
2024-06-13 13:01 ` Eric W. Biederman
2024-06-13 15:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-06-13 16:23 ` Eric W. Biederman
2024-07-05 16:08 ` Oleg Nesterov
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=20240613153021.GC18218@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=Sudhanva.Huruli@microsoft.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=apais@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=fuweid89@gmail.com \
--cc=j.granados@samsung.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=michael.christie@oracle.com \
--cc=mjguzik@gmail.com \
--cc=neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com \
--cc=rachelmenge@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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