From: Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@google.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Frédéric Weisbecker" <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: rientjes@google.com, mbligh@google.com, thockin@google.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: [PATCH v4] softlockup: remove hung_task_check_count
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 16:30:55 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090127003055.GA21269@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1232991701.4863.222.camel@laptop>
Peter Zijlstra (peterz@infradead.org) wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 09:36 -0800, Mandeep Baines wrote:
>
> > Unfortunately, this can't be done for hung_task. It writes to the
> > task_struct here:
>
> Don't top post!
>
> > static void check_hung_task(struct task_struct *t, unsigned long now,
> > unsigned long timeout)
> > {
> > unsigned long switch_count = t->nvcsw + t->nivcsw;
> >
> > if (t->flags & PF_FROZEN)
> > return;
> >
> > if (switch_count != t->last_switch_count || !t->last_switch_timestamp) {
> > t->last_switch_count = switch_count;
> > t->last_switch_timestamp = now;
> > return;
> > }
> >
> > It is able to get away with using only a read_lock because no one else
> > reads or writes to these fields.
>
> How would RCU be different here?
>
My bad, RCU wouldn't be any different. I misunderstood how RCU works. Just
spent the morning reading the LWN 3-part series on RCU and I think I'm able to
grok it now;)
Below is a patch to hung_task which removes the hung_task_check_count and
converts the read_locks to RCU.
Thanks Frédéric and Peter!
---
To avoid holding the tasklist lock too long, hung_task_check_count was used
as an upper bound on the number of tasks that are checked by hung_task.
This patch removes the hung_task_check_count sysctl.
Instead of checking a limited number of tasks, all tasks are checked. To
avoid holding the CPU for too long, need_resched() is checked often. To
avoid blocking out writers, the read_lock has been converted to an
rcu_read_lock().
It is safe convert to an rcu_read_lock() because the tasks and thread_group
lists are both protected by list_*_rcu() operations. The worst that can
happen is that hung_task will update last_switch_timestamp field of a DEAD
task.
The design was proposed by Frédéric Weisbecker. Peter Zijlstra suggested
the use of RCU.
Signed-off-by: Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@google.com>
---
include/linux/sched.h | 1 -
kernel/hung_task.c | 12 +++---------
kernel/sysctl.c | 9 ---------
3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
index f2f94d5..278121c 100644
--- a/include/linux/sched.h
+++ b/include/linux/sched.h
@@ -315,7 +315,6 @@ static inline void touch_all_softlockup_watchdogs(void)
#ifdef CONFIG_DETECT_HUNG_TASK
extern unsigned int sysctl_hung_task_panic;
-extern unsigned long sysctl_hung_task_check_count;
extern unsigned long sysctl_hung_task_timeout_secs;
extern unsigned long sysctl_hung_task_warnings;
extern int proc_dohung_task_timeout_secs(struct ctl_table *table, int write,
diff --git a/kernel/hung_task.c b/kernel/hung_task.c
index ba8ccd4..7d67350 100644
--- a/kernel/hung_task.c
+++ b/kernel/hung_task.c
@@ -17,11 +17,6 @@
#include <linux/sysctl.h>
/*
- * Have a reasonable limit on the number of tasks checked:
- */
-unsigned long __read_mostly sysctl_hung_task_check_count = 1024;
-
-/*
* Zero means infinite timeout - no checking done:
*/
unsigned long __read_mostly sysctl_hung_task_timeout_secs = 120;
@@ -116,7 +111,6 @@ static void check_hung_task(struct task_struct *t, unsigned long now,
*/
static void check_hung_uninterruptible_tasks(unsigned long timeout)
{
- int max_count = sysctl_hung_task_check_count;
unsigned long now = get_timestamp();
struct task_struct *g, *t;
@@ -127,16 +121,16 @@ static void check_hung_uninterruptible_tasks(unsigned long timeout)
if (test_taint(TAINT_DIE) || did_panic)
return;
- read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
+ rcu_read_lock();
do_each_thread(g, t) {
- if (!--max_count)
+ if (need_resched())
goto unlock;
/* use "==" to skip the TASK_KILLABLE tasks waiting on NFS */
if (t->state == TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE)
check_hung_task(t, now, timeout);
} while_each_thread(g, t);
unlock:
- read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
}
static void update_poll_jiffies(void)
diff --git a/kernel/sysctl.c b/kernel/sysctl.c
index 2481ed3..16526a2 100644
--- a/kernel/sysctl.c
+++ b/kernel/sysctl.c
@@ -820,15 +820,6 @@ static struct ctl_table kern_table[] = {
},
{
.ctl_name = CTL_UNNUMBERED,
- .procname = "hung_task_check_count",
- .data = &sysctl_hung_task_check_count,
- .maxlen = sizeof(unsigned long),
- .mode = 0644,
- .proc_handler = &proc_doulongvec_minmax,
- .strategy = &sysctl_intvec,
- },
- {
- .ctl_name = CTL_UNNUMBERED,
.procname = "hung_task_timeout_secs",
.data = &sysctl_hung_task_timeout_secs,
.maxlen = sizeof(unsigned long),
--
1.5.4.5
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-27 0:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-25 20:50 [RFC][PATCH 2/2] add a counter for writers spinning on a rwlock Frederic Weisbecker
2009-01-26 13:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-26 13:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-26 15:25 ` Frédéric Weisbecker
2009-01-26 15:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-26 16:04 ` Frédéric Weisbecker
2009-01-26 17:36 ` Mandeep Baines
2009-01-26 17:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-27 0:30 ` Mandeep Singh Baines [this message]
2009-01-27 9:27 ` [PATCH v4] softlockup: remove hung_task_check_count Frederic Weisbecker
2009-01-27 13:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-27 18:48 ` Mandeep Singh Baines
2009-01-28 8:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-29 1:42 ` Mandeep Singh Baines
2009-01-30 20:41 ` Mandeep Singh Baines
2009-01-30 20:46 ` [PATCH 1/2] softlockup: convert read_lock in hung_task to rcu_read_lock Mandeep Singh Baines
2009-01-30 20:49 ` [PATCH 2/2] softlockup: check all tasks in hung_task Mandeep Singh Baines
2009-01-31 19:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-02-03 0:05 ` [PATCH 2/2 v2] " Mandeep Singh Baines
2009-02-03 12:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-03 20:56 ` [PATCH 2/2 v3] " Mandeep Singh Baines
2009-02-04 19:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-05 4:35 ` [PATCH 2/2 v4] " Mandeep Singh Baines
2009-02-05 14:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-05 17:48 ` Andrew Morton
2009-02-05 18:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-05 18:30 ` Andrew Morton
2009-02-05 18:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-05 18:40 ` Mandeep Singh Baines
2009-02-05 17:56 ` [PATCH] softlockup: convert read_lock in hung_task to rcu_read_lock Mandeep Singh Baines
2009-02-05 18:13 ` Ingo Molnar
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=20090127003055.GA21269@google.com \
--to=msb@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mbligh@google.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=thockin@google.com \
/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
Powered by JetHome