From: Tejun Huh <tejun@aratech.co.kr>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: B.Zolnierkiewicz@elka.pw.edu.pl
Subject: [PATCH] ide task_map_rq() preempt count imbalance
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 14:52:57 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030903055257.GA31635@atj.dyndns.org> (raw)
Hello,
2.5 kernel continued to fail on my test machine with a lot of
scheduling while atomic messages. The offending function was
include/linux/ide.h:task_sectors() which calls task_map_rq() followed
by process_that_request_first(), taskfile_{input|output}_data() and
task_unmap_rq().
static inline void *task_map_rq(struct request *rq, unsigned long *flags)
{
/*
* fs request
*/
if (rq->cbio)
return rq_map_buffer(rq, flags);
/*
* task request
*/
return rq->buffer + blk_rq_offset(rq);
}
static inline void task_unmap_rq(struct request *rq, char *buffer, unsigned long *flags)
{
if (rq->cbio)
rq_unmap_buffer(buffer, flags);
}
rq_[un]map_buffer() eventually call into k[un]map_atomic() which
adjust preempt_count(). The problem is that rq->cbio is cleared by
process_that_request_first() before calling task_unmap_rq(), so the
preempt_count() isn't decremented properly.
As it seems that rq->cbio test is to avoid the cost of calling into
k[un]map_atomic, I just removed the optimization and it worked for me.
I'm not familiar with ide and block layer. If I got something wrong,
please point out.
--
tejun
# This is a BitKeeper generated patch for the following project:
# Project Name: Linux kernel tree
# This patch format is intended for GNU patch command version 2.5 or higher.
# This patch includes the following deltas:
# ChangeSet 1.1412 -> 1.1413
# include/linux/ide.h 1.72 -> 1.73
#
# The following is the BitKeeper ChangeSet Log
# --------------------------------------------
# 03/09/03 tj@atj.dyndns.org 1.1413
# - task_[un]map_rq() preempt count imbalance fixed.
# --------------------------------------------
#
diff -Nru a/include/linux/ide.h b/include/linux/ide.h
--- a/include/linux/ide.h Wed Sep 3 14:50:20 2003
+++ b/include/linux/ide.h Wed Sep 3 14:50:20 2003
@@ -853,22 +853,12 @@
static inline void *task_map_rq(struct request *rq, unsigned long *flags)
{
- /*
- * fs request
- */
- if (rq->cbio)
- return rq_map_buffer(rq, flags);
-
- /*
- * task request
- */
- return rq->buffer + blk_rq_offset(rq);
+ return rq_map_buffer(rq, flags);
}
static inline void task_unmap_rq(struct request *rq, char *buffer, unsigned long *flags)
{
- if (rq->cbio)
- rq_unmap_buffer(buffer, flags);
+ rq_unmap_buffer(buffer, flags);
}
#endif /* !CONFIG_IDE_TASKFILE_IO */
next reply other threads:[~2003-09-03 5:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-09-03 5:52 Tejun Huh [this message]
2003-09-03 6:40 ` Jens Axboe
2003-09-03 7:00 ` Tejun Huh
2003-09-03 15:53 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2003-09-06 2:18 ` Tejun Huh
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20030903055257.GA31635@atj.dyndns.org \
--to=tejun@aratech.co.kr \
--cc=B.Zolnierkiewicz@elka.pw.edu.pl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®