[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180323165921.GG10942@jcartwri.amer.corp.natinst.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 11:59:21 -0500
From: Julia Cartwright <julia@...com>
To: Joe Korty <joe.korty@...current-rt.com>
CC: <bigeasy@...utronix.de>, <mingo@...hat.com>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
<rostedt@...dmis.org>, <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RT] Defer migrate_enable migration while task state !=
TASK_RUNNING
Hey Joe-
Thanks for the writeup.
On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 11:09:59AM -0400, joe.korty@...current-rt.com wrote:
> I see the below kernel splat in 4.9-rt when I run a test program that
> continually changes the affinity of some set of running pids:
>
> do not call blocking ops when !TASK_RUNNING; state=2 set at ...
> ...
> stop_one_cpu+0x60/0x80
> migrate_enable+0x21f/0x3e0
> rt_spin_unlock+0x2f/0x40
> prepare_to_wait+0x5c/0x80
> ...
This is clearly a problem.
> The reason is that spin_unlock, write_unlock, and read_unlock call
> migrate_enable, and since 4.4-rt, migrate_enable will sleep if it discovers
> that a migration is in order. But sleeping in the unlock services is not
> expected by most kernel developers,
I don't buy this, see below:
> and where that counts most is in code sequences like the following:
>
> set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPIBLE);
> spin_unlock(&s);
> schedule();
The analog in mainline is CONFIG_PREEMPT and the implicit
preempt_enable() in spin_unlock(). In this configuration, a kernel
developer should _absolutely_ expect their task to be suspended (and
potentially migrated), _regardless of the task state_ if there is a
preemption event on the CPU on which this task is executing.
Similarly, on RT, there is nothing _conceptually_ wrong on RT with
migrating on migrate_enable(), regardless of task state, if there is a
pending migration event.
It's clear, however, that the mechanism used here is broken ...
Julia
Powered by blists - more mailing lists