[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5571D77E.3080203@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2015 13:08:14 -0400
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] stop_machine: Fix deadlock between multiple stop_two_cpus()
On 06/05/2015 11:30 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> Jiri reported a machine stuck in multi_cpu_stop() with
> migrate_swap_stop() as function and with the following src,dst cpu
> pairs: {11, 4} {13, 11} { 4, 13}
>
> 4 11 13
>
> cpuM: queue(4 ,13)
> *Ma
> cpuN: queue(13,11)
> *N Na
> *M Mb
> cpuO: queue(11, 4)
> *O Oa
> *Nb
> *Ob
>
> Where *X denotes the cpu running the queueing of cpu-X and X[ab] denotes
> the first/second queued work.
>
> You'll observe the top of the workqueue for each cpu: 4,11,13 to be work
> from cpus: M, O, N resp. IOW. deadlock.
>
> Do away with the queueing trickery and introduce lg_double_lock() to
> lock both CPUs and fully serialize the stop_two_cpus() callers instead
> of the partial (and buggy) serialization we have now.
>
> Completely untested..
>
> Reported-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Certainly looks like it would work.
I suspect we should probably apply this patch after some basic
testing, since the race is so incredibly hard to reproduce.
--
All rights reversed
--
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