mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: NeilBrown <nfbrown@novell.com>
Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, efault@gmx.de, mingo@kernel.org,
	hpa@zytor.com, vladimir.murzin@arm.com,
	linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org, jstancek@redhat.com,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [tip:locking/core] sched/wait: Fix signal handling in bit wait helpers
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 14:09:48 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151210130948.GW6356@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87si3bpaxy.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name>

On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 08:30:01AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 09 2015, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 12:06:33PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> >> On Tue, Dec 08 2015, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >> 
> >> >>  
> >> >
> >> > *sigh*, so that patch was broken.. the below might fix it, but please
> >> > someone look at it, I seem to have a less than stellar track record
> >> > here...
> >> 
> >> This new change seems to be more intrusive than should be needed.
> >> Can't we just do:
> >> 
> >> 
> >>  __sched int bit_wait(struct wait_bit_key *word)
> >>  {
> >> +	long state = current->state;
> >
> > No, current->state can already be changed by this time.
> 
> Does that matter?
> It can only have changed to TASK_RUNNING - right?
> In that case signal_pending_state() will return 0 and the bit_wait() acts
> as though the thread was woken up normally (which it was) rather than by
> a signal (which maybe it was too, but maybe that happened just a tiny
> bit later).
> 
> As long as signal delivery doesn't change ->state, we should be safe.
> We should even be safe testing ->state *after* the call the schedule().

Blergh, all I've managed to far is to confuse myself further. Even
something like the original (+- the EINTR) should work when we consider
the looping, even when mixed with an occasional spurious wakeup.


int bit_wait()
{
	if (signal_pending_state(current->state, current))
		return -EINTR;
	schedule();
}


This can go wrong against raising a signal thusly:

	prepare_to_wait()
1:	if (signal_pending_state(current->state, current))
		// false, nothing pending
	schedule();
				set_tsk_thread_flag(t, TIF_SIGPENDING);

		<spurious wakeup>

	prepare_to_wait()
				wake_up_state(t, ...);
2:	if (signal_pending_state(current->state, current))
		// false, TASK_RUNNING

	schedule(); // doesn't block because pending

	prepare_to_wait()
3:	if (signal_pending_state(current->state, current))
		// true, pending



  reply	other threads:[~2015-12-10 13:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-11-20 15:35 [BISECTED] rcu_sched self-detected stall since 3.17 Vladimir Murzin
2015-12-01 11:50 ` Vladimir Murzin
2015-12-01 13:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-12-02  9:04   ` Vladimir Murzin
2015-12-04 11:52   ` [tip:locking/core] sched/wait: Fix signal handling in bit wait helpers tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2015-12-08 10:47     ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-12-09  1:06       ` NeilBrown
2015-12-09  7:40         ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-12-09 21:30           ` NeilBrown
2015-12-10 13:09             ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2015-12-11 11:30               ` Paul Turner
2015-12-11 11:39                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-12-11 11:53                   ` Vladimir Murzin
2015-12-11 13:08                   ` Jan Stancek
2015-12-11 13:22                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-12-11 17:57                   ` Vladimir Murzin
2015-12-15 18:16                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-12-15 19:01                 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-12-15 16:56   ` [BISECTED] rcu_sched self-detected stall since 3.17 Oleg Nesterov

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=20151210130948.GW6356@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jstancek@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=nfbrown@novell.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=vladimir.murzin@arm.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