[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150317170920.GA21493@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 18:09:20 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...hat.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, rientjes@...gle.com,
dwysocha@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] hung_task: Change hung_task.c to use
for_each_process_thread()
On 03/17, Aaron Tomlin wrote:
>
> --- a/kernel/hung_task.c
> +++ b/kernel/hung_task.c
> @@ -169,7 +169,7 @@ static void check_hung_uninterruptible_tasks(unsigned long timeout)
> return;
>
> rcu_read_lock();
> - do_each_thread(g, t) {
> + for_each_process_thread(g, t) {
> if (!max_count--)
> goto unlock;
> if (!--batch_count) {
> @@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ static void check_hung_uninterruptible_tasks(unsigned long timeout)
> /* use "==" to skip the TASK_KILLABLE tasks waiting on NFS */
> if (t->state == TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE)
> check_hung_task(t, timeout);
> - } while_each_thread(g, t);
> + }
Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Perhaps it also makes sense to improve this rcu_lock_break a bit...
For example, if 't' is dead but 'g' is alive we can continue the
"for_each_process" part of this double loop. And if 't' is still
alive then we can find the new leader and continue...
But I agree, lets start from this fix, then we will see.
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