From: yjin <yanjiang.jin@windriver.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: <mingo@redhat.com>, <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
<peterz@infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<jinyanjiang@gmail.com>, <stable-rt@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RT PATCH] sched: rt: fix two possible deadlocks in push_irq_work_func
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 12:40:42 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5646BB4A.50307@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151113232512.53df431f@gandalf.local.home>
On 2015年11月14日 12:25, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Nov 2015 10:53:18 +0800
> <yanjiang.jin@windriver.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Yanjiang Jin <yanjiang.jin@windriver.com>
>>
>> This can only happen in RT kernel due to run_timer_softirq() calls
>> irq_work_tick() when CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL is enabled as below:
>>
>> static void run_timer_softirq(struct softirq_action *h)
>> {
>> ........
>> if defined(CONFIG_IRQ_WORK) && defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL)
>> irq_work_tick();
>> endif
>> ........
>> }
>>
>> Use raw_spin_{un,}lock_irq{save,restore} in push_irq_work_func() to
>> prevent following potentially deadlock scenario:
> Ug. No, the real fix is that the irq work is to be run from hard
> interrupt context.
But if so, we shouldn't call irq_work_tick() in run_timer_softirq(), right?
Thanks!
Yanjiang
> Moving the scheduling of high priority real-time
> tasks to ksoftirqd defeats the purpose. The question is, why is that
> irq work being run from thread context when it has the
> IRQ_WORK_HARD_IRQ flag set?
>
> -- Steve
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-14 5:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-14 2:53 [RT PATCH] sched: rt: fix two possible deadlocks in push_irq_work_func yanjiang.jin
2015-11-14 4:25 ` Steven Rostedt
2015-11-14 4:40 ` yjin [this message]
2015-11-15 8:15 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-11-15 8:26 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-11-15 11:05 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-11-16 5:26 ` yjin
2015-11-18 15:56 ` 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=5646BB4A.50307@windriver.com \
--to=yanjiang.jin@windriver.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=jinyanjiang@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=stable-rt@vger.kernel.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