From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Simon Kagstrom <simon.kagstrom@netinsight.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com,
rusty@rustcorp.com.au, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mingo@elte.hu
Subject: Re: [PATCH] core: workqueue: BUG_ON on workqueue recursion
Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 11:12:57 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B6A2D29.3010804@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100203194350.GA13824@redhat.com>
Hello,
On 02/04/2010 04:43 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 02/03, Simon Kagstrom wrote:
>>
>> When the workqueue is flushed from workqueue context (recursively), the
>> system enters a strange state where things at random (dependent on the
>> global workqueue) start misbehaving. For example, for us the console and
>> logins locks up while the web server continues running.
>>
>> Since the system becomes unstable, change this to a BUG_ON instead.
>
> I agree with this patch. We are going to deadlock anyway, if the
> condition is true the caller is cwq->current_work, this means
> flush_cpu_workqueue() will insert the barrier and hang.
>
> However,
>
>> @@ -482,7 +482,7 @@ static int flush_cpu_workqueue(struct cpu_workqueue_struct *cwq)
>> int active = 0;
>> struct wq_barrier barr;
>>
>> - WARN_ON(cwq->thread == current);
>> + BUG_ON(cwq->thread == current);
>
> Another option is change the code to do
>
> if (WARN_ON(cwq->thread == current))
> return;
>
> This gives the kernel chance to survive after the warning.
>
> What do you think?
Yeah, I like this one better too. Even solely for debugging,
WARN_ON() is better as often users don't have reliable ways to gather
kernel log after a BUG_ON().
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-04 2:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-02-03 11:27 [PATCH] core: workqueue: BUG_ON on workqueue recursion Simon Kagstrom
2010-02-03 19:43 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-02-04 2:12 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2010-02-04 8:02 ` [PATCH v2] core: workqueue: return " Simon Kagstrom
2010-02-04 10:52 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-02-12 8:47 ` Tejun Heo
2010-02-04 2:00 ` [PATCH] core: workqueue: BUG_ON " Lai Jiangshan
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=4B6A2D29.3010804@kernel.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=simon.kagstrom@netinsight.net \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).