[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1311121103-16978-6-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 17:18:22 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@...e.hu, laijs@...fujitsu.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca,
josh@...htriplett.org, niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
peterz@...radead.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
dhowells@...hat.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com, darren@...art.com,
patches@...aro.org, greearb@...delatech.com, edt@....ca,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/urgent 6/7] softirq,rcu: Inform RCU of irq_exit() activity
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
The rcu_read_unlock_special() function relies on in_irq() to exclude
scheduler activity from interrupt level. This fails because exit_irq()
can invoke the scheduler after clearing the preempt_count() bits that
in_irq() uses to determine that it is at interrupt level. This situation
can result in failures as follows:
$task IRQ SoftIRQ
rcu_read_lock()
/* do stuff */
<preempt> |= UNLOCK_BLOCKED
rcu_read_unlock()
--t->rcu_read_lock_nesting
irq_enter();
/* do stuff, don't use RCU */
irq_exit();
sub_preempt_count(IRQ_EXIT_OFFSET);
invoke_softirq()
ttwu();
spin_lock_irq(&pi->lock)
rcu_read_lock();
/* do stuff */
rcu_read_unlock();
rcu_read_unlock_special()
rcu_report_exp_rnp()
ttwu()
spin_lock_irq(&pi->lock) /* deadlock */
rcu_read_unlock_special(t);
Ed can simply trigger this 'easy' because invoke_softirq() immediately
does a ttwu() of ksoftirqd/# instead of doing the in-place softirq stuff
first, but even without that the above happens.
Cure this by also excluding softirqs from the
rcu_read_unlock_special() handler and ensuring the force_irqthreads
ksoftirqd/# wakeup is done from full softirq context.
[ Alternatively, delaying the ->rcu_read_lock_nesting decrement
until after the special handling would make the thing more robust
in the face of interrupts as well. And there is a separate patch
for that. ]
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Reported-and-tested-by: Ed Tomlinson <edt@....ca>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
kernel/rcutree_plugin.h | 2 +-
kernel/softirq.c | 12 ++++++++++--
2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h
index ad4539a..6c96c67 100644
--- a/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h
+++ b/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h
@@ -318,7 +318,7 @@ static noinline void rcu_read_unlock_special(struct task_struct *t)
}
/* Hardware IRQ handlers cannot block. */
- if (in_irq()) {
+ if (in_irq() || in_serving_softirq()) {
local_irq_restore(flags);
return;
}
diff --git a/kernel/softirq.c b/kernel/softirq.c
index 40cf63d..fca82c3 100644
--- a/kernel/softirq.c
+++ b/kernel/softirq.c
@@ -315,16 +315,24 @@ static inline void invoke_softirq(void)
{
if (!force_irqthreads)
__do_softirq();
- else
+ else {
+ __local_bh_disable((unsigned long)__builtin_return_address(0),
+ SOFTIRQ_OFFSET);
wakeup_softirqd();
+ __local_bh_enable(SOFTIRQ_OFFSET);
+ }
}
#else
static inline void invoke_softirq(void)
{
if (!force_irqthreads)
do_softirq();
- else
+ else {
+ __local_bh_disable((unsigned long)__builtin_return_address(0),
+ SOFTIRQ_OFFSET);
wakeup_softirqd();
+ __local_bh_enable(SOFTIRQ_OFFSET);
+ }
}
#endif
--
1.7.3.2
--
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