From: Andres Salomon <dilinger@debian.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo@kvack.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: [PATCH] dynticks: don't unlock spinlock twice
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 21:52:40 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <45E8E2F8.1030102@debian.org> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1415 bytes --]
During boot with dynticks enabled, we would sometimes get:
[ 35.271900] Switched to high resolution mode on CPU 0
[ 35.304468] BUG: spinlock already unlocked on CPU#0, swapper/1
[ 35.338099] lock: c06428a0, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: <none>/-1,
.owner_cpu:
-1
[ 35.373597] [<c04d7cf0>] _raw_spin_unlock+0x28/0x67
[ 35.406647] [<c05ba279>] _spin_unlock+0x5/0x23
[ 35.439369] [<c04255f7>] tick_sched_timer+0x4e/0xa7
[ 35.472388] [<c04255a9>] tick_sched_timer+0x0/0xa7
[ 35.504833] [<c0422528>] hrtimer_run_queues+0x199/0x1ec
[ 35.537617] [<c0416b72>] run_timer_softirq+0x12/0x166
[ 35.570019] [<c04144d9>] __do_softirq+0x40/0x85
[ 35.601542] [<c0405494>] do_softirq+0x53/0xa9
...
This appears to be caused by run_hrtimer_queue() (called by
hrtimer_run_queues) calling spin_unlock_irq(&cpu_base->lock) before
calling timer->function(timer). The callback function
(tick_sched_timer) expects cpu_base->lock to be held when it is called,
and attempts to unlock it. Since it doesn't seem like anything within
tick_sched_timer really needs to hold the lock (afaict), the attached
patch simply removes the lock handling from tick_sched_timer. Things
called by tick_sched_timer may grab the base->lock, but that's fine (and
their responsibility). Let me know if there's some reason why the lock
should be held, and I can rework this.
Signed-off-by: Andres Salomon <dilinger@debian.org>
[-- Attachment #2: x --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1415 bytes --]
diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
index 51556b9..b43bccb 100644
--- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
+++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
@@ -422,13 +422,12 @@ static inline void tick_nohz_switch_to_nohz(void) { }
#ifdef CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS
/*
* We rearm the timer until we get disabled by the idle code
- * Called with interrupts disabled and timer->base->cpu_base->lock held.
+ * Called with interrupts disabled and timer->base->cpu_base->lock *not* held.
*/
static enum hrtimer_restart tick_sched_timer(struct hrtimer *timer)
{
struct tick_sched *ts =
container_of(timer, struct tick_sched, sched_timer);
- struct hrtimer_cpu_base *base = timer->base->cpu_base;
struct pt_regs *regs = get_irq_regs();
ktime_t now = ktime_get();
@@ -454,13 +453,12 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart tick_sched_timer(struct hrtimer *timer)
}
/*
* update_process_times() might take tasklist_lock, hence
- * drop the base lock. sched-tick hrtimers are per-CPU and
- * never accessible by userspace APIs, so this is safe to do.
+ * we don't attempt to grab the base lock here.
+ * sched-tick hrtimers are per-CPU and never accessible by
+ * userspace APIs, so this is safe to do.
*/
- spin_unlock(&base->lock);
update_process_times(user_mode(regs));
profile_tick(CPU_PROFILING);
- spin_lock(&base->lock);
}
/* Do not restart, when we are in the idle loop */
next reply other threads:[~2007-03-03 2:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-03 2:52 Andres Salomon [this message]
2007-03-03 9:02 ` [PATCH] dynticks: don't unlock spinlock twice Thomas Gleixner
2007-03-04 11:14 ` Andres Salomon
2007-03-04 13:09 ` [PATCH] highres: Do not run the TIMER_SOFTIRQ after switching to highres mode Thomas Gleixner
2007-03-04 13:12 ` Andres Salomon
2007-03-04 13:23 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-03-05 7:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-03-05 7:50 ` Andres Salomon
2007-03-05 7:52 ` Ingo Molnar
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=45E8E2F8.1030102@debian.org \
--to=dilinger@debian.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcelo@kvack.org \
--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