[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1294308909.2016.321.camel@laptop>
Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2011 11:15:09 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, paulus@...ba.org,
davem@...emloft.net, fweisbec@...il.com,
perfmon2-devel@...ts.sf.net, eranian@...il.com,
robert.richter@....com, acme@...hat.com, lizf@...fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] perf_events: add cgroup support (v7)
On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 22:39 +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> Peter,
>
> On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 12:23 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 18:20 +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> >>> +void
> >>> +perf_cgroup_switch(struct task_struct *task, struct task_struct *next)
> >>> +{
> >>> + struct perf_cgroup *cgrp_out = perf_cgroup_from_task(task);
> >>> + struct perf_cgroup *cgrp_in = perf_cgroup_from_task(next);
> >>> + struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx;
> >>> + struct pmu *pmu;
> >>> + /*
> >>> + * if task is DEAD, then css_out is irrelevant, it has
> >>> + * been changed to init_cgrp in cgroup_exit() from do_exit().
> >>> + * Furthermore, perf_cgroup_exit_task(), has scheduled out
> >>> + * all css constrained events, only unconstrained events
> >>> + * remain. Therefore we need to reschedule based on css_in.
> >>> + */
> >>> + if (task->state != TASK_DEAD && cgrp_out == cgrp_in)
> >>> + return;
> >>
> >> I think that check is broken, TASK_DEAD is set way after calling
> >> cgroup_exit(), so if we get preempted in between there you'll still go
> >> funny.
> >>
>
> I looked at this part again.
>
> The original code checking for TASK_DEAD is correct.
>
> The reason is simple, you're looking at perf_cgroup_switch() which is
> invoked as part of schedule() and NOT perf_event_task_exit() (called
> prior to cgroup_exit()).
> Thus, by the time you do the final schedule(), the task state has indeed
> been switched to TASK_DEAD.
>
> I remember testing for this condition during the debug phase.
But, cgroup_exit() detaches the task from the cgroup, after which the
cgroup can disappear. Furthermore, we can schedule after cgroup_exit()
and before the explicit schedule() invocation.
Some of the exit functions (say proc_exit_connector) can block and cause
scheduling, and with PREEMPT=y we can get preempted.
This means you'll be context switching, and thus possibly calling
perf_cgroup_switch(), on a task who's cgroup is possibly destroyed.
So I'm not at all seeing how this is correct.
--
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