Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 28 Feb 2007 22:16:19 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH]: Use stop_machine_run in the Intel RNG driver |
| |
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 07:22:00 -0500 Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com> wrote:
> Replace call_smp_function with stop_machine_run in the Intel RNG driver. > > CPU A has done read_lock(&lock) > CPU B has done write_lock_irq(&lock) and is waiting for A to release the lock. > > A third CPU calls call_smp_function and issues the IPI. CPU A takes CPU C's > IPI. CPU B is waiting with interrupts disabled and does not see the IPI. > CPU C is stuck waiting for CPU B to respond to the IPI. > > Deadlock.
I think what you're describing here is just the standard old smp_call_function() deadlock, rather than anything which is specific to intel-rng, yes?
It is "well known" that you can't call smp_call_function() with local interrupts disabled. In fact i386 will spit a warning if you try it.
intel-rng doesn't do that, but what it _does_ do is:
smp_call_function(..., wait = 0); local_irq_disable();
so some CPUs will still be entering the IPI while this CPU has gone and disabled interrupts, thus exposing us to the deadlock, yes?
In which case a suitable fix might be to make intel-rng spin until all the other CPUs have entered intel_init_wait().
> The solution is to use stop_machine_run instead of call_smp_function > (call_smp_function should not be called in situations where the CPUs may > be suspended).
But that seems to be a nice change anyway. It took rather a lot of code churn to do it, and it does find it necessary to export stop_machine_run() to modules, but that seems OK too.
- 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/
| |