From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Carsten Emde <C.Emde@osadl.org>, John Kacur <jkacur@redhat.com>,
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RT 1/2] rwsem-rt: Do not allow readers to nest
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 13:15:57 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54EDBCFD.5030307@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150218151352.2968cf06@grimm.local.home>
On 02/18/2015 09:13 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> Here the same thing but without cmpxchg(). _If_ after an increment the
>> value is negative then we take slowpath. Otherwise we have the lock.
>
> OK, so I need to make it so it can nest with trylock. I have to look at
> the patch again because it has been a while.
I have reverted the patch and can confirm that cpufreq works again.
I did some testing on vanilla and -RT:
- down_read(l) + down_read(l)
this triggers a lockdep warning about a possible deadlock the lock is
obtained.
- down_read(l) + down_read_trylock()
this passes without a warning.
So I think we good now.
> An RW sem must not do two down_read()s on the same lock (it's fine for
> a trylock if it has a fail safe for it). The reason is, the second
> down_read() will block if there's a writer waiting. Thus you are
> guaranteed a deadlock if you have the lock for read, a write comes in
> and waits, and you grab the RW sem again, because it will block, and
> the writer is waiting for the reader to release. Thus you have a
> deadlock.
I fully understand. However nesting is allowed according to the code in
vanilla and now again in -RT. Lockdep complains properly so we should
catch people doing it wrong in both trees.
> I'll have to revisit this. I also need to revisit the multi readers
> (although Thomas hates it, but he even admitted there's a better way to
> do it. Now only if I could remember what that was ;-)
Okay. For now I keep the revert since it looks sane and simple.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -- Steve
Sebastian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-25 12:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-09 2:47 [PATCH RT 0/2] rwsem-rt: Make rwsem rt closer to mainline Steven Rostedt
2014-04-09 2:47 ` [PATCH RT 1/2] rwsem-rt: Do not allow readers to nest Steven Rostedt
2014-05-02 9:04 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2015-02-18 19:57 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2015-02-18 20:13 ` Steven Rostedt
2015-02-20 5:07 ` Jason Low
2015-02-25 12:15 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2014-04-09 2:47 ` [PATCH RT 2/2] rtmutex: Remove duplicate rt_mutex_init() Steven Rostedt
2014-05-02 9:08 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2014-05-02 13:12 ` Steven Rostedt
2014-05-02 13:21 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
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=54EDBCFD.5030307@linutronix.de \
--to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=C.Emde@osadl.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jkacur@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul.gortmaker@windriver.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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