[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20120106210108.AB18.E1E9C6FF@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2012 21:01:08 +0900
From: Yasunori Goto <y-goto@...fujitsu.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Motohiro Kosaki <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Linux Kernel ML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] TASK_DEAD task is able to be woken up in special condition
> On Fri, 2012-01-06 at 19:22 +0900, Yasunori Goto wrote:
> > I just confirmed booting up on my box, and I would like to get rough agreement
> > about this way to solve this issue at first.
>
> I really don't like it. It makes the ttwu path more complex and more
> expensive. ttwu is one of the hottest and more complex paths in the
> scheduler, it needs neither more overhead nor more complexity.
Hmmmmm.
Ok.
>
> I'd really much rather put another raw_spin_unlocked_wait() in do_exit()
> before we set TASK_DEAD. It probably needs an smp memory barrier too.
Do you mean the following patch?
---
Signed-off-by: Yasunori Goto <y-goto@...fujitsu.com>
---
kernel/exit.c | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
Index: linux-3.2-rc7/kernel/exit.c
===================================================================
--- linux-3.2-rc7.orig/kernel/exit.c
+++ linux-3.2-rc7/kernel/exit.c
@@ -1038,6 +1038,10 @@ NORET_TYPE void do_exit(long code)
preempt_disable();
exit_rcu();
+
+ smp_mb();
+ raw_spin_unlock_wait(&tsk->pi_lock);
+
/* causes final put_task_struct in finish_task_switch(). */
tsk->state = TASK_DEAD;
schedule();
--
Yasunori Goto
--
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