[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1216985986.7257.375.camel@twins>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:39:46 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@...il.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [patch, rfc: 1/2] sched, hotplug: safe use of
rq->migration_thread and find_busiest_queue()
On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 00:11 +0200, Dmitry Adamushko wrote:
> From: Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@...il.com>
> Subject: sched, hotplug: safe use of rq->migration_thread
> and find_busiest_queue()
>
> ---
>
> sched, hotplug: safe use of rq->migration_thread and find_busiest_queue()
>
> (1) make usre rq->migration_thread is valid when we access it in set_cpus_allowed_ptr()
> after releasing the rq-lock;
>
> (2) in load_balance() and load_balance_idle()
>
> ensure that we don't get 'busiest' which can disappear as a result of cpu_down()
> while we are manipulating it. For this goal, we choose 'busiest' only amongst
> 'cpu_active_map' cpus.
>
> load_balance() and load_balance_idle() get called with preemption being disabled
> so synchronize_sched() in cpu_down() should get us synced.
>
> IOW, as soon as synchronize_sched() has been done in cpu_down(cpu), the run-queue for
> can't be manipulated/accessed by the load-balancer.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@...il.com>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
> index 6acf749..b4ccc8b 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched.c
> @@ -3409,7 +3409,14 @@ static int load_balance(int this_cpu, struct rq *this_rq,
> struct rq *busiest;
> unsigned long flags;
>
> - cpus_setall(*cpus);
> + /*
> + * Ensure that we don't get 'busiest' which can disappear
> + * as a result of cpu_down() while we are manipulating it.
> + *
> + * load_balance() gets called with preemption being disabled
> + * so synchronize_sched() in cpu_down() should get us synced.
> + */
> + *cpus = cpu_active_map;
This is going to be painful on -rt... there it can be preempted. I guess
we can put get_online_cpus() around it or something..
> /*
> * When power savings policy is enabled for the parent domain, idle
> @@ -3571,7 +3578,14 @@ load_balance_newidle(int this_cpu, struct rq *this_rq, struct sched_domain *sd,
> int sd_idle = 0;
> int all_pinned = 0;
>
> - cpus_setall(*cpus);
> + /*
> + * Ensure that we don't get 'busiest' which can disappear
> + * as a result of cpu_down() while we are manipulating it.
> + *
> + * load_balance_newidle() gets called with preemption being disabled
> + * so synchronize_sched() in cpu_down() should get us synced.
> + */
> + *cpus = cpu_active_map;
>
> /*
> * When power savings policy is enabled for the parent domain, idle
> @@ -5764,9 +5778,14 @@ int set_cpus_allowed_ptr(struct task_struct *p, const cpumask_t *new_mask)
> goto out;
>
> if (migrate_task(p, any_online_cpu(*new_mask), &req)) {
> - /* Need help from migration thread: drop lock and wait. */
> + /* Need to wait for migration thread (might exit: take ref). */
> + struct task_struct *mt = rq->migration_thread;
> +
> + get_task_struct(mt);
> task_rq_unlock(rq, &flags);
> - wake_up_process(rq->migration_thread);
> + wake_up_process(mt);
> + put_task_struct(mt);
> +
> wait_for_completion(&req.done);
> tlb_migrate_finish(p->mm);
> return 0;
>
>
--
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