[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130830002021.GZ3871@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 17:20:21 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Libin <huawei.libin@...wei.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, tj@...nel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
eparis@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
ebiederm@...ssion.com, john.stultz@...aro.org, mingo@...hat.com,
peterz@...radead.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lizefan@...wei.com,
jovi.zhangwei@...wei.com, guohanjun@...wei.com,
zhangdianfang@...wei.com, wangyijing@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/14] kthread: Fix invalid wakeup in kthreadd
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 09:57:36PM +0800, Libin wrote:
> If kthreadd is preempted at(or before) location a, and the other thread,
> such as calling kthread_create_on_node(), adds a list item to
> the kthread_create_list followed with wake_up_process(kthread). After that
> when kthreadd is re-scheduled, calling set_current_state to set itself as
> state TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, if it is preempted again after that and before
> __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING), it triggers the invalid wakeup problem.
> ------------------------
> kthreadd()
> ------------------------
> ...
> for (;;) {
> //location a
> set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> if (list_empty(&kthread_create_list)) {
> //location b
> schedule();
> //location c
> }
> __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
> //location d
> ...
> ------------------------
> kthread_create_on_node()
> ------------------------
> ...
> spin_lock(&kthread_create_lock);
> list_add_tail(&create.list, &kthread_create_list);
> spin_unlock(&kthread_create_lock);
> ...
> wake_up_process(kthreadd_task);
> ...
>
> To solve this problem, using preempt_disable() to bound the operaion that
> setting the task state and the conditions(set by the wake thread) validation.
> ------------------------
> kthreadd()
> ------------------------
> ...
> for (;;) {
> preempt_disable();
> set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> if (list_empty(&kthread_create_list)) {
> preempt_enable();
> schedule();
> preempt_disable();
> }
> ...
>
> Signed-off-by: Libin <huawei.libin@...wei.com>
> ---
> kernel/kthread.c | 7 ++++++-
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/kthread.c b/kernel/kthread.c
> index 760e86d..25c3fed 100644
> --- a/kernel/kthread.c
> +++ b/kernel/kthread.c
> @@ -456,10 +456,15 @@ int kthreadd(void *unused)
> current->flags |= PF_NOFREEZE;
>
> for (;;) {
> + preempt_disable();
> set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> - if (list_empty(&kthread_create_list))
And this one already has the list_empty() check after the call to
set_current_state(), so no change should be needed here.
On the other hand, if your testing shows that you are losing wakeups
with this exact code, please let us know!
Thanx, Paul
> + if (list_empty(&kthread_create_list)) {
> + preempt_enable();
> schedule();
> + preempt_disable();
> + }
> __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
> + preempt_enable();
>
> spin_lock(&kthread_create_lock);
> while (!list_empty(&kthread_create_list)) {
> --
> 1.8.2.1
>
>
--
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