From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Simon Kirby <sim@hostway.ca>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: Linux 3.1-rc9
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 23:00:35 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1110172237030.3240@ionos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1318879396.4172.92.camel@twins>
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-10-17 at 11:31 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> wrote:
> > >
> > > I could of course propose this... but I really won't since I'm half
> > > retching by now.. ;-)
> >
> > Wow. Is this "ugly and fragile code week" and I just didn't get the memo?
>
> Do I get a price?
>
> > I do wonder if we might not fix the problem by just taking the
> > *existing* lock in the right order?
> >
> > IOW, how nasty would be it be to make "scheduler_tick()" just get the
> > cputimer->lock outside or rq->lock?
> >
> > Sure, we'd hold that lock *much* longer than we need, but how much do
> > we care? Is that a lock that gets contention? It migth be the simple
> > solution for now - I *would* like to get 3.1 out..
>
> Ah, sadly the tick isn't the only one with the inverted callchain,
> pretty much every callchain in the scheduler ends up in update_curr()
> one way or another.
>
> The easier way around might be something like this... even when two
> threads in a process race to enable this clock the the wasted time is
> pretty much of the same order as we would otherwise have wasted spinning
> on the lock and the update_gt_cputime() think would end up moving the
> clock fwd to the latest outcome any which way.
>
> Humm,. Thomas anything?
No, that should work. It does not make that call path more racy
against exit, which is another trainwreck at least on 32bit machines
which I discovered while looking for the problems with your patch.
thread_group_cputime() reads task->signal->utime/stime/sum_sched_runtime
These fields are updated in __exit_signal() w/o holding
task->signal->cputimer.lock. So nothing prevents that these values
change while we read them.
All callers of thread_group_cputime() except the scheduler callpath
hold sighand lock, which is also taken in __exit_signal().
So your patch does not make that particular case worse.
That said, I really need some sleep before I can make a final
judgement on that horror. The call paths are such an intermingled mess
that it's not funny anymore. I do that tomorrow morning first thing.
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-17 21:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 98+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-10-05 1:40 Linux 3.1-rc9 Linus Torvalds
2011-10-07 7:08 ` Simon Kirby
2011-10-07 17:48 ` Simon Kirby
2011-10-07 18:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-10-08 0:33 ` Simon Kirby
2011-10-08 0:50 ` Simon Kirby
2011-10-08 7:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-10-12 21:35 ` Simon Kirby
2011-10-13 23:25 ` Simon Kirby
2011-10-17 1:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-10-17 4:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-10-17 9:03 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-10-17 10:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-10-17 11:40 ` Alan Cox
2011-10-17 18:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-10-17 20:35 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-10-17 21:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-10-17 21:22 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-10-17 21:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-10-17 22:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-10-17 22:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-10-17 22:08 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-10-18 6:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-10-18 7:12 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-10-18 18:50 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-10-17 21:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-10-17 7:55 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2011-10-17 9:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-10-17 9:18 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2011-10-17 20:48 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-10-18 7:20 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2011-10-17 10:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-10-17 14:07 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2011-10-17 14:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-10-17 17:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-10-17 18:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-10-17 19:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-10-17 21:00 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2011-10-18 8:39 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-10-18 9:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-10-18 14:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-10-18 15:26 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-10-18 18:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-10-18 18:14 ` [GIT PULL] timer fix Ingo Molnar
2011-10-18 16:13 ` Linux 3.1-rc9 Dave Jones
2011-10-18 18:20 ` Simon Kirby
2011-10-18 19:48 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-10-18 20:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-10-25 15:26 ` Simon Kirby
2011-10-26 1:47 ` Yong Zhang
2011-10-24 19:02 ` Simon Kirby
2011-10-25 7:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-10-25 9:01 ` David Miller
2011-10-25 12:30 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-10-25 23:18 ` David Miller
2011-10-25 20:20 ` Simon Kirby
2011-10-31 17:32 ` Simon Kirby
2011-11-02 16:40 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-11-02 17:27 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-11-02 17:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-11-02 17:53 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-11-02 18:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-11-02 18:05 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-11-02 18:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-11-02 17:49 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-11-02 17:58 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-11-02 19:16 ` Simon Kirby
2011-11-02 22:42 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-11-03 0:24 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-11-03 0:52 ` Simon Kirby
2011-11-03 22:07 ` David Miller
2011-11-03 6:06 ` Jörg-Volker Peetz
2011-11-03 6:26 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-11-03 6:43 ` David Miller
2011-11-02 17:54 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-11-02 18:04 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-11-02 18:28 ` Simon Kirby
2011-11-02 18:30 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-11-02 22:10 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-11-02 23:00 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-11-03 0:09 ` Simon Kirby
2011-11-03 0:15 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-11-03 0:17 ` Simon Kirby
2011-11-18 23:11 ` [tip:perf/core] lockdep: Show subclass in pretty print of lockdep output tip-bot for Steven Rostedt
2011-10-20 14:36 ` Linux 3.1-rc9 Martin Schwidefsky
2011-10-23 11:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-10-24 7:48 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2011-10-24 7:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-10-24 8:08 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2011-10-18 5:40 ` Simon Kirby
2011-10-09 20:51 ` Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz
2011-10-10 2:29 ` [tpmdd-devel] " Stefan Berger
2011-10-10 16:23 ` Rajiv Andrade
2011-10-10 17:05 ` Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz
2011-10-10 17:22 ` Stefan Berger
2011-10-10 17:57 ` Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz
2011-10-10 21:08 ` Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz
2011-10-11 7:09 ` [tpmdd-devel] " Peter.Huewe
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=alpine.LFD.2.02.1110172237030.3240@ionos \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=sim@hostway.ca \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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