[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YObi/nNu115qg5Rr@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2021 13:35:26 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, bristot@...hat.com, bsegall@...gle.com,
mgorman@...e.de, Mark Simmons <msimmons@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/rt: Fix double enqueue caused by rt_effective_prio
On Thu, Jul 01, 2021 at 11:14:31AM +0200, Juri Lelli wrote:
> Looks like this survives the test case (and regression testing), but I'm
> still not fully convinced that the above statement "Concurrent priority
> inheritance handling is still safe and will eventually converge to a new
> state by following the inheritance chain(s)" is actually sound.
I think we good there. rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain() updates ->prio in
step 7 and calls rt_mutex_setprio() in step 11.
So if we race against __sched_setschedule() and observe the old value,
step 11 will follow up and correct us.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists