lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [May]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
SubjectRe: [BUG] "sched: Remove rq->lock from the first half of ttwu()" locks up on ARM
From
Date
On Thu, 2011-05-26 at 13:32 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> The bad news is of course that I've got a little more head-scratching to
> do, will keep you informed.

OK, that wasn't too hard.. (/me crosses fingers and prays Marc doesn't
find more funnies ;-).

Does the below cure all woes?

---
Subject: sched: Fix ttwu() for __ARCH_WANT_INTERRUPTS_ON_CTXSW
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Date: Thu May 26 14:21:33 CEST 2011
Marc reported that e4a52bcb9 (sched: Remove rq->lock from the first
half of ttwu()) broke his ARM-SMP machine. Now ARM is one of the few
__ARCH_WANT_INTERRUPTS_ON_CTXSW users, so that exception in the ttwu()
code was suspect.

Yong found that the interrupt could hit hits after context_switch() changes
current but before it clears p->on_cpu, if that interrupt were to
attempt a wake-up of p we would indeed find ourselves spinning in IRQ
context.

Sort this by reverting to the old behaviour for this situation and
perform a full remote wake-up.

Cc: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@am.sony.com>
Cc: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@gmail.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Reported-by: Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
---
kernel/sched.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched.c
+++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
@@ -2573,7 +2573,26 @@ static void ttwu_queue_remote(struct tas
if (!next)
smp_send_reschedule(cpu);
}
-#endif
+
+#ifdef __ARCH_WANT_INTERRUPTS_ON_CTXSW
+static int ttwu_activate_remote(struct task_struct *p, int wake_flags)
+{
+ struct rq *rq;
+ int ret = 0;
+
+ rq = __task_rq_lock(p);
+ if (p->on_cpu) {
+ ttwu_activate(rq, p, ENQUEUE_WAKEUP);
+ ttwu_do_wakeup(rq, p, wake_flags);
+ ret = 1;
+ }
+ __task_rq_unlock(rq);
+
+ return ret;
+
+}
+#endif /* __ARCH_WANT_INTERRUPTS_ON_CTXSW */
+#endif /* CONFIG_SMP */

static void ttwu_queue(struct task_struct *p, int cpu)
{
@@ -2631,17 +2650,17 @@ try_to_wake_up(struct task_struct *p, un
while (p->on_cpu) {
#ifdef __ARCH_WANT_INTERRUPTS_ON_CTXSW
/*
- * If called from interrupt context we could have landed in the
- * middle of schedule(), in this case we should take care not
- * to spin on ->on_cpu if p is current, since that would
- * deadlock.
+ * In case the architecture enables interrupts in
+ * context_switch(), we cannot busy wait, since that
+ * would lead to live-locks when an interrupt hits and
+ * tries to wake up @prev. So bail and do a complete
+ * remote wakeup.
*/
- if (p == current) {
- ttwu_queue(p, cpu);
+ if (ttwu_activate_remote(p, wake_flags))
goto stat;
- }
-#endif
+#else
cpu_relax();
+#endif
}
/*
* Pairs with the smp_wmb() in finish_lock_switch().


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-05-26 14:25    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site