[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c44d6ab34f2f4e4a5d36036cc8b356a3f4f3519b.camel@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:31:17 -0500
From: Scott Wood <swood@...hat.com>
To: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RT v2 3/3] rcu: Disable use_softirq on PREEMPT_RT
On Thu, 2019-08-22 at 09:59 -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 06:19:06PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> > I think the prohibition on use_softirq can be dropped once RT gets the
> > latest RCU code, but the question of what use_softirq should default
> > to on PREEMPT_RT remains.
>
> Independent of the question of what use_softirq should default to, could
> we
> test RT with latest RCU code now to check if the deadlock goes away? That
> way, maybe we can find any issues in current RCU that cause scheduler
> deadlocks in the situation you pointed. The reason I am asking is because
> recently additional commits [1] try to prevent deadlock and it'd be nice
> to
> ensure that other conditions are not lingering (I don't think they are but
> it'd be nice to be sure).
>
> I am happy to do such testing myself if you want, however what does it
> take
> to apply the RT patchset to the latest mainline? Is it an achievable feat?
I did run such a test (cherry picking all RCU patches that aren't already in
RT, plus your RFC patch to rcu_read_unlock_special, rather than applying RT
to current mainline) with rcutorture plus a looping kernel build overnight,
and didn't see any splats with or without use_softirq.
-Scott
Powered by blists - more mailing lists