From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
htejun@gmail.com
Subject: Re: rcu_preempt detected stalls.
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 13:24:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141023202443.GE4977@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141023195337.GA7768@redhat.com>
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 09:53:37PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 10/23, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > OK, so making each pass through the loop a separate RCU read-side critical
> > section might be considered to be suppressing notification of an error
> > condition?
>
> I agree, this change probably makes sense anyway. Personally I'd prefer
> the version below (somehow I hate multiple unlock's), but I won't insist.
Your code, your rules. ;-)
But given this structure, why not use a for() loop replace the
"goto retry" with an inverted condition and a "return error"?
Maybe something like the following patch?
Thanx, Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
signal: Exit RCU read-side critical section on each pass through loop
The kill_pid_info() can potentially loop indefinitely if tasks are created
and deleted sufficiently quickly, and if this happens, this function
will remain in a single RCU read-side critical section indefinitely.
This commit therefore exits the RCU read-side critical section on each
pass through the loop. Because a race must happen to retry the loop,
this should have no performance impact in the common case.
Reported-by: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c
index 8f0876f9f6dd..54820984a872 100644
--- a/kernel/signal.c
+++ b/kernel/signal.c
@@ -1331,23 +1331,21 @@ int kill_pid_info(int sig, struct siginfo *info, struct pid *pid)
int error = -ESRCH;
struct task_struct *p;
- rcu_read_lock();
-retry:
- p = pid_task(pid, PIDTYPE_PID);
- if (p) {
- error = group_send_sig_info(sig, info, p);
- if (unlikely(error == -ESRCH))
- /*
- * The task was unhashed in between, try again.
- * If it is dead, pid_task() will return NULL,
- * if we race with de_thread() it will find the
- * new leader.
- */
- goto retry;
- }
- rcu_read_unlock();
+ for (;;) {
+ rcu_read_lock();
+ p = pid_task(pid, PIDTYPE_PID);
+ if (p)
+ error = group_send_sig_info(sig, info, p);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
+ if (likely(!p || error != -ESRCH))
+ return error;
- return error;
+ /*
+ * The task was unhashed in between, try again. If it
+ * is dead, pid_task() will return NULL, if we race with
+ * de_thread() it will find the new leader.
+ */
+ }
}
int kill_proc_info(int sig, struct siginfo *info, pid_t pid)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-23 20:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-13 17:35 Dave Jones
2014-10-15 2:35 ` Sasha Levin
2014-10-23 18:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-10-23 18:55 ` Sasha Levin
2014-10-23 19:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-10-24 12:28 ` Sasha Levin
2014-10-24 16:13 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-10-24 16:39 ` Sasha Levin
2014-10-27 21:13 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-10-27 23:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-11-13 23:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-11-13 23:10 ` Sasha Levin
2014-10-30 23:41 ` Sasha Levin
2014-10-23 18:32 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-10-23 18:40 ` Dave Jones
2014-10-23 19:28 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-10-23 19:37 ` Dave Jones
2014-10-23 19:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-10-23 20:28 ` Dave Jones
2014-10-23 20:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-10-23 19:13 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-23 19:38 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-10-23 19:53 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-23 20:24 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2014-10-23 21:13 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-23 21:38 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-10-25 3:16 ` Dâniel Fraga
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=20141023202443.GE4977@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=htejun@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.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