linux-kernel - Re: 3.4.4-rt13: btrfs + xfstests 006 = BOOM.. and a bonus rt_mutex deadlock report for absolutely free!

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1342455968.7659.93.camel@marge.simpson.net>
Date:	Mon, 16 Jul 2012 18:26:08 +0200
From:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Chris Mason <chris.mason@...ionio.com>,
	"Chris L. Mason" <clmason@...ionio.com>,
	"linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: 3.4.4-rt13: btrfs + xfstests 006 = BOOM..  and a bonus rt_mutex
 deadlock report for absolutely free!

On Mon, 2012-07-16 at 12:02 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: 
> On Mon, 2012-07-16 at 04:02 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> 
> > > Great, thanks!  I got stuck in bug land on Friday.  You mentioned
> > > performance problems earlier on Saturday, did this improve performance?
> > 
> > Yeah, the read_trylock() seems to improve throughput.  That's not
> > heavily tested, but it certainly looks like it does.  No idea why.
> 
> Ouch, you just turned the rt_read_lock() into a spin lock. If a higher
> priority process preempted a lower priority process that holds the same
> lock, it will deadlock.

Hm, how, it's doing cpu_chill()?

> I'm not sure why you would get a performance benefit from this, as the
> mutex used is an adaptive one (failure to acquire the lock will only
> sleep if preempted or if the owner is not running).

I'm not attached to it, can whack it in a heartbeat.. especially so it
the thing can deadlock.  I've seen enough of those of late.

> We should look at why this performs better (if it really does).

Not sure it really does, there's variance, but it looked like it did.

-Mike


--
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/