[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200622094126.GN576888@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 11:41:26 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
paulmck@...nel.org, frederic@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] sched: Fix ttwu_queue_cond()
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 10:11:22AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 02:56:55PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Where the condition:
> >
> > !cpus_share_cache(smp_processor_id(), cpu)
> >
> > already implies 'cpu != smp_processor_id()', because a CPU always
> > shares cache with itself, the secondary condition added in commit:
> >
> > 2ebb17717550 ("sched/core: Offload wakee task activation if it the wakee is descheduling")
> >
> > voids that implication, resulting in attempting to do local wake-ups
> > through the queue mechanism.
> >
> > Fixes: 2ebb17717550 ("sched/core: Offload wakee task activation if it the wakee is descheduling")
> > Reported-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
> > Tested-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
>
> Yep, I mistakenly though this would be covered by the self-wakeup check
> early in try_to_wake_up() but it is not
It is, one should not be able to observe 'p->on_cpu && task_cpu(cpu) ==
smp_processor_id()); I've since found the actual problem, find here:
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200620184622.GA19696@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72
I'm currently polishing the changelog a little, and will shortly post a
new version of that.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists