[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140801155310.GA2945@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 17:53:10 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
laijs@...fujitsu.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
dvhart@...ux.intel.com, fweisbec@...il.com, bobby.prani@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 01/10] rcu: Add call_rcu_tasks()
On 07/30, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + for_each_process_thread(g, t) {
> + if (t != current && ACCESS_ONCE(t->on_rq) &&
> + !is_idle_task(t)) {
> + t->rcu_tasks_nvcsw = ACCESS_ONCE(t->nvcsw);
> + t->rcu_tasks_holdout = 1;
> + list_add(&t->rcu_tasks_holdout_list,
> + &rcu_tasks_holdouts);
> + }
> + }
> + rcu_read_unlock();
Wait, unless I missed something this can't work...
The problem is, once the exiting task passes exit_notify() it can
be removed from rcu lists.
Now suppose that (say) proc_exit_connector() has a probe, and this
task has jumped into trampoline and it was preempted there.
No?
Oleg.
--
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