From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@intel.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, jesse.brandeburg@ingel.com, tglx@linuxtronix.de
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] workqueue.c: should schedule work serialize work->func
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2010 09:42:57 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B452E11.90404@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100106230512.17900.47310.stgit@localhost.localdomain>
Hello,
On 01/07/2010 08:05 AM, John Fastabend wrote:
> codepath
> schedule_work(); ... ; run_workqueue() -> work_clear_pending() -> f(work)
>
> Although schedule_work() will only schedule the task if it is not already
> on the work queue the WORK_STRUCT_PENDING bits are cleared just before
> calling the work function. If work is scheduled after this occurs and
> before f(work) completes it is possible to have multiple calls into f().
>
> Should the kernel protect us from this? With something like the patch
> below.
This is by design. Multithread workqueue doesn't protect against
works running simultaneously on different cpus. The callback is
responsible for synchronization.
> diff --git a/include/linux/workqueue.h b/include/linux/workqueue.h
> index 9466e86..fa6ffea 100644
> --- a/include/linux/workqueue.h
> +++ b/include/linux/workqueue.h
> @@ -26,7 +26,8 @@ struct work_struct {
> atomic_long_t data;
> #define WORK_STRUCT_PENDING 0 /* T if work item pending execution */
> #define WORK_STRUCT_STATIC 1 /* static initializer (debugobjects) */
> -#define WORK_STRUCT_FLAG_MASK (3UL)
> +#define WORK_STRUCT_RUNNING 2
> +#define WORK_STRUCT_FLAG_MASK (7UL) /* 0111 */
> #define WORK_STRUCT_WQ_DATA_MASK (~WORK_STRUCT_FLAG_MASK)
> struct list_head entry;
> work_func_t func;
> diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
> index dee4865..b867125 100644
> --- a/kernel/workqueue.c
> +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
> @@ -397,10 +397,13 @@ static void run_workqueue(struct cpu_workqueue_struct *cwq)
> spin_unlock_irq(&cwq->lock);
>
> BUG_ON(get_wq_data(work) != cwq);
> + while (test_and_set_bit(WORK_STRUCT_RUNNING, work_data_bits(work)))
> + cpu_relax();
> work_clear_pending(work);
> lock_map_acquire(&cwq->wq->lockdep_map);
> lock_map_acquire(&lockdep_map);
> f(work);
> + clear_bit(WORK_STRUCT_RUNNING, work_data_bits(work));
work is not accessible at this point. f() may have freed it already.
Thanks.
--
tejun
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-01-07 0:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-01-06 23:05 [RFC PATCH] workqueue.c: should schedule work serialize work->func John Fastabend
2010-01-07 0:42 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
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=4B452E11.90404@kernel.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=jesse.brandeburg@ingel.com \
--cc=john.r.fastabend@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linuxtronix.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).