[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130912203020.GB1798@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 22:30:20 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
Dave Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...onical.com>,
Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@...are.com>,
intel-gfx <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [BUG] completely bonkers use of set_need_resched +
VM_FAULT_NOPAGE
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 05:35:43PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Not quite, as it would be possible for the evil userspace to trigger a
> GPU hang that would cause the sane userspace to spin indefinitely
> waiting for the error recovery to kick in.
So with FIFOn+1 preempting FIFOn its a live-lock because the faulting
thread will forever keep yielding to itself since its the highest
priority task around, therefore the set_need_resched() is an absolute
NOP in that case.
For OTHER it might run another task with set_need_resched(), without
set_need_resched() it'll simply spin on the fault until it runs out of
time and gets force preempted and another task gets to run.
So for either case, the set_need_resched() doesn't make an appreciable
difference.
Removing it will not make evil userspace much worse -- at worst it will
cause slightly more wasted cycles.
--
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