lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [May]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [BUG] "sched: Remove rq->lock from the first half of ttwu()" locks up on ARM
On 05/26, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> 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))

Stupid question. Can't we fix this problem if we do

- if (p == current)
+ if (cpu == raw_smp_processor_id())

?

I forgot the rules... but iirc task_cpu(p) can't be changed under us?

Oleg.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-05-26 17:49    [W:0.093 / U:1.372 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site