[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <19f34abd0806260234y7616bab2k54bc019dfb0c6305@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:34:19 +0200
From: "Vegard Nossum" <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
To: "Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>
Cc: "Paul Jackson" <pj@....com>, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
maxk@...lcomm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] CPUSets: Move most calls to rebuild_sched_domains() to the workqueue
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 9:56 AM, Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com> wrote:
> CPUsets: Move most calls to rebuild_sched_domains() to the workqueue
>
> In the current cpusets code the lock nesting between cgroup_mutex and
> cpuhotplug.lock when calling rebuild_sched_domains is inconsistent -
> in the CPU hotplug path cpuhotplug.lock nests outside cgroup_mutex,
> and in all other paths that call rebuild_sched_domains() it nests
> inside.
>
> This patch makes most calls to rebuild_sched_domains() asynchronous
> via the workqueue, which removes the nesting of the two locks in that
> case. In the case of an actual hotplug event, cpuhotplug.lock nests
> outside cgroup_mutex as now.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
>
> ---
>
> Note that all I've done with this patch is verify that it compiles
> without warnings; I'm not sure how to trigger a hotplug event to test
> the lock dependencies or verify that scheduler domain support is still
> behaving correctly. Vegard, does this fix the problems that you were
> seeing? Paul/Max, does this still seem sane with regard to scheduler
> domains?
Nope, sorry :-(
=======================================================
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
2.6.26-rc8-dirty #39
-------------------------------------------------------
bash/3510 is trying to acquire lock:
(events){--..}, at: [<c0145690>] cleanup_workqueue_thread+0x10/0x70
but task is already holding lock:
(&cpu_hotplug.lock){--..}, at: [<c015d9da>] cpu_hotplug_begin+0x1a/0x50
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #2 (&cpu_hotplug.lock){--..}:
[<c0158e65>] __lock_acquire+0xf45/0x1040
[<c0158ff8>] lock_acquire+0x98/0xd0
[<c057e6a1>] mutex_lock_nested+0xb1/0x300
[<c015da3c>] get_online_cpus+0x2c/0x40
[<c0162c98>] delayed_rebuild_sched_domains+0x8/0x30
[<c014548b>] run_workqueue+0x15b/0x1f0
[<c0145f09>] worker_thread+0x99/0xf0
[<c0148772>] kthread+0x42/0x70
[<c0105a63>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x14
[<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
-> #1 (rebuild_sched_domains_work){--..}:
[<c0158e65>] __lock_acquire+0xf45/0x1040
[<c0158ff8>] lock_acquire+0x98/0xd0
[<c0145486>] run_workqueue+0x156/0x1f0
[<c0145f09>] worker_thread+0x99/0xf0
[<c0148772>] kthread+0x42/0x70
[<c0105a63>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x14
[<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
-> #0 (events){--..}:
[<c0158a15>] __lock_acquire+0xaf5/0x1040
[<c0158ff8>] lock_acquire+0x98/0xd0
[<c01456b6>] cleanup_workqueue_thread+0x36/0x70
[<c055d91a>] workqueue_cpu_callback+0x7a/0x130
[<c014d497>] notifier_call_chain+0x37/0x70
[<c014d509>] __raw_notifier_call_chain+0x19/0x20
[<c014d52a>] raw_notifier_call_chain+0x1a/0x20
[<c055bb28>] _cpu_down+0x148/0x240
[<c055bc4b>] cpu_down+0x2b/0x40
[<c055ce69>] store_online+0x39/0x80
[<c02fb91b>] sysdev_store+0x2b/0x40
[<c01dd0a2>] sysfs_write_file+0xa2/0x100
[<c019ecc6>] vfs_write+0x96/0x130
[<c019f38d>] sys_write+0x3d/0x70
[<c0104ceb>] sysenter_past_esp+0x78/0xd1
[<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
other info that might help us debug this:
3 locks held by bash/3510:
#0: (&buffer->mutex){--..}, at: [<c01dd02b>] sysfs_write_file+0x2b/0x100
#1: (cpu_add_remove_lock){--..}, at: [<c015d97f>]
cpu_maps_update_begin+0xf/0x20
#2: (&cpu_hotplug.lock){--..}, at: [<c015d9da>] cpu_hotplug_begin+0x1a/0x50
stack backtrace:
Pid: 3510, comm: bash Not tainted 2.6.26-rc8-dirty #39
[<c0156517>] print_circular_bug_tail+0x77/0x90
[<c0155b93>] ? print_circular_bug_entry+0x43/0x50
[<c0158a15>] __lock_acquire+0xaf5/0x1040
[<c010aeb5>] ? native_sched_clock+0xb5/0x110
[<c0157895>] ? mark_held_locks+0x65/0x80
[<c0158ff8>] lock_acquire+0x98/0xd0
[<c0145690>] ? cleanup_workqueue_thread+0x10/0x70
[<c01456b6>] cleanup_workqueue_thread+0x36/0x70
[<c0145690>] ? cleanup_workqueue_thread+0x10/0x70
[<c055d91a>] workqueue_cpu_callback+0x7a/0x130
[<c0580613>] ? _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x43/0x70
[<c014d497>] notifier_call_chain+0x37/0x70
[<c014d509>] __raw_notifier_call_chain+0x19/0x20
[<c014d52a>] raw_notifier_call_chain+0x1a/0x20
[<c055bb28>] _cpu_down+0x148/0x240
[<c015d97f>] ? cpu_maps_update_begin+0xf/0x20
[<c055bc4b>] cpu_down+0x2b/0x40
[<c055ce69>] store_online+0x39/0x80
[<c055ce30>] ? store_online+0x0/0x80
[<c02fb91b>] sysdev_store+0x2b/0x40
[<c01dd0a2>] sysfs_write_file+0xa2/0x100
[<c019ecc6>] vfs_write+0x96/0x130
[<c01dd000>] ? sysfs_write_file+0x0/0x100
[<c019f38d>] sys_write+0x3d/0x70
[<c0104ceb>] sysenter_past_esp+0x78/0xd1
=======================
Vegard
--
"The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while
the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it
disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation."
-- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists