lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: tasklet_kill will always hang for recursive tasklets on a UP
> Hi,
> While going thru the code for tasklet_kill(), I cannot figure out
> how recursive tasklets (tasklets that schedule themselves from within
> their tasklet handler) can be killed by this function. To me it looks that
> tasklet_kill will never complete for such tasklets.

It is realy a sophisticated piece of code! I think it is not
the only bug you found. Some weeks ago I pointed out another
problem with tasklet_kill but got no answer.

To work our questions out is not done in just 1 minute :-(
And I was not able to find the person, who is responsible for the code.

As far as I can see, you missed nothing.
The tasklet enters itself to the "task_vec" list, because the
SCHED-Bit is always resetted, when "tasklet_schedule" is called.
It will always succeed.

Maybe you have a look to another (my) problem:

The function "tasklet_schedule" schedules a tasklet only, if the SCHED-Bit
ist _not_ set. So the trick is, to _set_ the SCHED-Bit and
to _not_ enter the tasklet in the "task_vec" list (ok, you showed
that this trick can fail). But anyway, if you look at the
code, tasklet_kill resets the bit in any case!!! It would have to
set the bit, not to reset it. Any comments?

void tasklet_kill(struct tasklet_struct *t)
{
...
while (test_and_set_bit(TASKLET_STATE_SCHED, &t->state)) {
do
yield();
while (test_bit(TASKLET_STATE_SCHED, &t->state));
}
tasklet_unlock_wait(t);
clear_bit(TASKLET_STATE_SCHED, &t->state);
}

> void tasklet_kill(struct tasklet_struct *t)
> {
> ...
> ...
> while (test_and_set_bit(TASKLET_STATE_SCHED, &t->state)) {
> current->state = TASK_RUNNING;
> do
> sys_sched_yield();
> while (test_bit(TASKLET_STATE_SCHED, &t->state));
> }
> ...
> ...
> }
>
> The above while loop will only exit if TASKLET_STATE_SCHED is not set
> (tasklet is not scheduled).
> Now if we see tasklet_action
>
> static void tasklet_action(struct softirq_action *a)
> {
> ...
> ...
> if (!atomic_read(&t->count)) {
> --> TASKLET_STATE_SCHED is set here
> if(!test_and_clear_bit(TASKLET_STATE_SCHED, &t->state))
> BUG();
> t->func(t->data);
> --> if we schedule the tasklet inside its handler,
> --> TASKLET_STATE_SCHED will be set here also
> tasklet_unlock(t);
> continue;
> }
> ...
> ...
> }
>
> The only small window when TASKLET_STATE_SCHED is not set is between the
> time when test_and_clear_bit above clears it and by the time the tasklet
> handler again calls tasklet_schedule(). But since tasklet_kill is called
> from user context the while loop in tasklet_kill checking for
> TASKLET_STATE_SCHED to be cleared cannot interleave between the above two
> lines in tasklet_action and hence tasklet_kill will never come out of the
> while loop.
> This is true only for UP machines.
>
> Pleae point me out if I am missing something.
>
> Thanx
> tomar
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:48    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans