[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100628092341.5b011a0a.randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 09:23:41 -0700
From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Ilya Loginov <isloginov@...il.com>,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] init: Fix race between init and kthreadd -v3
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 16:51:01 +0200 Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 16:19 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > I think you may be using a mutex as a completion in essence. Why not use
> > completions instead?
>
> Totally forgot about those things.. Yes they fit perfectly.
>
> ---
> Subject: init: Fix race between init and kthreadd -v2
>
> Ilya reported that on a very slow machine he could reliably reproduce a
> race between forking init and kthreadd. We first fork init so that it
> obtains pid-1, however since the scheduler is already fully running at
> this point it can preempt and run the init thread before we spawn and
> set kthreadd_task.
>
> The init thread can then attempt spawning kthreads without kthreadd
> being present which results in an OOPS.
>
> Reported-by: Ilya Loginov <isloginov@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
> ---
> init/main.c | 12 ++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/init/main.c b/init/main.c
> index e2a2bf3..2280f63 100644
> --- a/init/main.c
> +++ b/init/main.c
> @@ -420,18 +420,26 @@ static void __init setup_command_line(char *command_line)
> * gcc-3.4 accidentally inlines this function, so use noinline.
> */
>
> +static __initdata DECLARE_COMPLETION(kthreadd_done);
> +
> static noinline void __init_refok rest_init(void)
> __releases(kernel_lock)
> {
> int pid;
>
> rcu_scheduler_starting();
> + /*
> + * We need to spawn init first so that it obtains pid-1, however
Would be better to say "pid 1" or "pid=1".
"pid-1" seems odd to me.
> + * the init task will end up wanting to create kthreads, which, if
> + * we schedule it before we create kthreadd, will OOPS.
> + */
> kernel_thread(kernel_init, NULL, CLONE_FS | CLONE_SIGHAND);
> numa_default_policy();
> pid = kernel_thread(kthreadd, NULL, CLONE_FS | CLONE_FILES);
> rcu_read_lock();
> kthreadd_task = find_task_by_pid_ns(pid, &init_pid_ns);
> rcu_read_unlock();
> + complete(&kthreadd_done);
> unlock_kernel();
>
> /*
> @@ -847,6 +855,10 @@ static noinline int init_post(void)
>
> static int __init kernel_init(void * unused)
> {
> + /*
> + * Wait until kthreadd is all set-up.
> + */
> + wait_for_completion(&kthreadd_done);
> lock_kernel();
>
> /*
>
> --
---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
--
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