lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Aug]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH RT v2 2/3] sched: migrate_enable: Use sleeping_lock to indicate involuntary sleep
On 2019-08-28 05:54:26 [-0700], Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 11:27:39AM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > On 2019-08-27 08:53:06 [-0700], Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > Am I understanding this correctly?
> >
> > Everything perfect except that it is not lockdep complaining but the
> > WARN_ON_ONCE() in rcu_note_context_switch().
>
> This one, right?
>
> WARN_ON_ONCE(!preempt && t->rcu_read_lock_nesting > 0);
>
> Another approach would be to change that WARN_ON_ONCE(). This fix might
> be too extreme, as it would suppress other issues:
>
> WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_BASE) && !preempt && t->rcu_read_lock_nesting > 0);
>
> But maybe what is happening under the covers is that preempt is being
> set when sleeping on a spinlock. Is that the case?

I would like to keep that check and that is why we have:

| #if defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL)
| sleeping_l = t->sleeping_lock;
| #endif
| WARN_ON_ONCE(!preempt && t->rcu_read_lock_nesting > 0 && !sleeping_l);

in -RT and ->sleeping_lock is that counter that is incremented in
spin_lock(). And the only reason why sleeping_lock_inc() was used in the
patch was to disable _this_ warning.

> Thanx, Paul

Sebastian

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-08-28 15:14    [W:0.173 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site