Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 6 Nov 2006 01:53:38 +0300 | From | Oleg Nesterov <> | Subject | Re: PATCH? hrtimer_wakeup: fix a theoretical race wrt rt_mutex_slowlock() |
| |
On 11/05, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Sun, 5 Nov 2006, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > When task->array != NULL, try_to_wake_up() just goes to "out_running" and sets > > task->state = TASK_RUNNING. > > > > In that case hrtimer_wakeup() does: > > > > timeout->task = NULL; <----- [1] > > > > spin_lock(runqueues->lock); > > > > task->state = TASK_RUNNING; <----- [2] > > > > from Documentation/memory-barriers.txt > > > > Memory operations that occur before a LOCK operation may appear to > > happen after it completes. > > > > This means that [2] may be completed before [1], and > > Yes. On x86 (and x86-64) you'll never see this, because writes are always > seen in order regardless, and in addition, the spin_lock is actually > totally serializing anyway. On most other architectures, the spin_lock > will serialize all the writes too, but it's not guaranteed, so in theory > you're right. I suspect no actual architecture will do this, but hey, > when talking memory ordering, safe is a lot better than sorry. > > That said, since "task->state" in only tested _inside_ the runqueue lock, > there is no race that I can see. Since we've gotten the runqueue lock in > order to even check task-state, the processor that _sets_ task state must > not only have done the "spin_lock()", it must also have done the > "spin_unlock()", and _that_ will not allow either the timeout or the task > state to haev leaked out from under it (because that would imply that the > critical region leaked out too). > > So I don't think the race exists anyway - the schedule() will return > immediately (because it will see TASK_RUNNING), and we'll just retry.
schedule() will see TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE. hrtimer_wakeup() sets TASK_RUNNING, rt_mutex_slowlock() does set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE) after that. schedule() takes runqueue lock, yes, but we are testing timeout->task before.
Oleg.
- 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/
| |