[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <jhjimjsvyoe.mognet@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 15:26:41 +0000
From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>
To: Qian Cai <cai@....pw>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, paulmck@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: suspicious RCU due to "Prefer using an idle CPU as a migration target instead of comparing tasks"
On Thu, Feb 27 2020, Qian Cai wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-02-27 at 09:09 -0500, Qian Cai wrote:
>> The linux-next commit ff7db0bf24db ("sched/numa: Prefer using an idle CPU as a
>> migration target instead of comparing tasks") introduced a boot warning,
>
> This?
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index a61d83ea2930..ca780cd1eae2 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -1607,7 +1607,9 @@ static void update_numa_stats(struct task_numa_env *env,
> if (ns->idle_cpu == -1)
> ns->idle_cpu = cpu;
>
> +rcu_read_lock();
> idle_core = numa_idle_core(idle_core, cpu);
> +rcu_read_unlock();
> }
> }
>
Hmph right, we have
numa_idle_core()->test_idle_cores()->rcu_dereference().
Dunno if it's preferable to wrap the entirety of update_numa_stats() or
if that fine-grained read-side section is ok.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists