[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111019160037.GA11087@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 09:00:37 -0700
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...il.com>
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, Simon Kirby <sim@...tway.ca>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
stable@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Patch Upstream: cputimer: Cure lock inversion
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:55:01AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:39:14AM -0400, Gregs git-bot wrote:
> >> commit: bcd5cff7216f9b2de0a148cc355eac199dc6f1cf
> >> From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
> >> Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 11:50:30 +0200
> >> Subject: cputimer: Cure lock inversion
> >>
> >> There's a lock inversion between the cputimer->lock and rq->lock;
> >> notably the two callchains involved are:
> >>
> >> update_rlimit_cpu()
> >> sighand->siglock
> >> set_process_cpu_timer()
> >> cpu_timer_sample_group()
> >> thread_group_cputimer()
> >> cputimer->lock
> >> thread_group_cputime()
> >> task_sched_runtime()
> >> ->pi_lock
> >> rq->lock
> >>
> >> scheduler_tick()
> >> rq->lock
> >> task_tick_fair()
> >> update_curr()
> >> account_group_exec()
> >> cputimer->lock
> >>
> >> Where the first one is enabling a CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID timer, and
> >> the second one is keeping up-to-date.
> >>
> >> This problem was introduced by e8abccb7193 ("posix-cpu-timers: Cure
> >> SMP accounting oddities").
> >
> > There is no such patch in Linus's tree that I can find. So, what
> > problem is this really trying to cure here and what kernel did it show
> > up in?
>
> Uh...
>
> bcd5cff7216f9b2de0a148cc355eac199dc6f1cf is the upstream commit (post -rc10).
No, I understand that this is the commit I just referenced.
I'm talking about the "This problem was introduced..." line in the
commit. I want to find out what was the original problem that this
patch is fixing, to determine how far back in the -stable series I need
to backport this to.
The issue is that there is no e8abccb7193 ("posix-cpu-timers: Cure
SMP accounting oddities") commit that I can see in Linus's tree right
now.
> This thread covers the conversation (it's long):
>
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1199406/focus=1204676
Ugh, I'll go dig, but help would be appreciated...
greg k-h
--
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