lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Jan]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 16/17] sched: Move the second half of ttwu() to the remote cpu
On 12/24, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> +static void
> +ttwu_do_activate(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int wake_flags)
> +{
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> + if (task_cpu(p) != cpu_of(rq))
> + set_task_cpu(p, cpu_of(rq));
> +#endif

This looks a bit suspicious.

If this is called by sched_ttwu_pending() we are holding rq->lock,
not task_rq_lock(). It seems, we can race with, say, migration
thread running on task_cpu().



OK, p->state = TASK_WAKING protects us against, say, set_cpus_allowed_ptr()
which does task_rq_lock(p) and thus checks task_is_waking().

But, at the same time,

> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> +static void ttwu_queue_remote(struct task_struct *p, int cpu)
> +{
> + struct task_struct *next = NULL;
> + struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
> +
> + for (;;) {
> + struct task_struct *old = next;
> +
> + p->wake_entry = next;
> + next = cmpxchg(&rq->wake_list, old, p);
> + if (next == old)
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + if (!next)
> + smp_send_reschedule(cpu);

what if that cpu does set_cpus_allowed_ptr(p) ?

It spins with irq disabled. Once the caller, try_to_wake_up(),
drops ->pi_lock it will wait for !task_is_waking() forever, no?

Oleg.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-01-04 15:39    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans