[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4BAAD1EB.4020201@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 11:00:59 +0800
From: Miao Xie <miaox@...fujitsu.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Ben Blum <bblum@...gle.com>, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] kill the broken and deadlockable cpuset_lock/cpuset_cpus_allowed_locked
code
on 2010-3-15 17:10, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> This patch just states the fact the cpusets/cpuhotplug interaction is
> broken and removes the deadlockable code which only pretends to work.
>
> - cpuset_lock() doesn't really work. It is needed for
> cpuset_cpus_allowed_locked() but we can't take this lock in
> try_to_wake_up()->select_fallback_rq() path.
>
> - cpuset_lock() is deadlockable. Suppose that a task T bound to CPU takes
> callback_mutex. If cpu_down(CPU) happens before T drops callback_mutex
> stop_machine() preempts T, then migration_call(CPU_DEAD) tries to take
> cpuset_lock() and hangs forever because CPU is already dead and thus
> T can't be scheduled.
The problem what you said don't exist, because the kernel already move T to
the active cpu when preparing to turn off a CPU.
Thanks!
Miao
--
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