From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
mingo@redhat.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Pinning down a blocked task to extract diagnostics
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2020 17:40:27 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200306014027.GA11942@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200305153638.GC2935@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
On Thu, Mar 05, 2020 at 07:36:38AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 05, 2020 at 09:28:45AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Thu, 5 Mar 2020 06:22:45 -0800
> > "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Mar 05, 2020 at 09:13:37AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[ . . . ]
> > > How about if I add something like this, located right by try_to_wake_up()?
> > >
> > > bool try_to_keep_sleeping(struct task_struct *t)
> > > {
> > > raw_spin_lock_irq(&t->pi_lock);
> > > switch (t->state) {
> > > case TASK_RUNNING:
> > > case TASK_WAKING:
> > > raw_spin_unlock_irq(&t->pi_lock);
> > > return false;
> > >
> > > default:
> > > if (t->on_rq) {
> >
> > Somehow I think there still needs to be a read barrier before the test to
> > on_rq.
>
> This is nowhere near a fastpath, so if there is uncertainty it gets
> the smp_rmb(). Or an smp_load_acquire() on t->state.
>
> > > raw_spin_unlock_irq(&t->pi_lock);
> > > return false;
> > > }
> > >
> > > /* OK to extract consistent diagnostic information. */
> > > return true;
> > > }
> > > /* NOTREACHED */
> > > }
> > >
> > > Then a use might look like this:
> > >
> > > if (try_to_keep_sleeping(t))
> > > /* Extract consistent diagnostic information. */
> > > raw_spin_unlock_irq(&t->pi_lock);
> >
> > Perhaps we should have a allow_awake(t) to match it?
> >
> > allow_awake(t);
> >
> > Where we have:
> >
> > static inline allow_awake(struct task_struct *t)
> > {
> > raw_spin_unlock_irq(&t->pi_lock);
> > }
>
> Makes sense to me!
So how about like this?
Thanx, Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
commit e2821ae6c6a6adaabc89ccd9babf4375a78e0626
Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Date: Thu Mar 5 16:53:58 2020 -0800
sched/core: Add functions to prevent sleepers from awakening
In some cases, it is necessary to examine a consistent version of a
sleeping process's state, in other words, it is necessary to keep
that process in sleeping state. This commit therefore provides a
try_to_keep_sleeping() function that acquires ->pi_lock to prevent
wakeups from proceeding, returning true if the function is still asleep,
and otherwise releasing ->pi_lock and returning false.
This commit also provides an allow_awake() function (as suggested by
by Steven Rostedt) that reverses the effect of a successful call to
try_to_keep_sleeping(), allowing the process to once again be awakened.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
[ paulmck: Apply feedback from Peter Zijlstra and Steven Rostedt. ]
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
diff --git a/include/linux/wait.h b/include/linux/wait.h
index 3283c8d..aefea4a 100644
--- a/include/linux/wait.h
+++ b/include/linux/wait.h
@@ -1148,4 +1148,7 @@ int autoremove_wake_function(struct wait_queue_entry *wq_entry, unsigned mode, i
(wait)->flags = 0; \
} while (0)
+bool try_to_keep_sleeping(struct task_struct *p);
+void allow_awake(struct task_struct *p);
+
#endif /* _LINUX_WAIT_H */
diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index fc1dfc0..b665ff7 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -2654,6 +2654,48 @@ try_to_wake_up(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int state, int wake_flags)
}
/**
+ * try_to_keep_sleeping - Attempt to force task to remain off runqueues
+ * @p: The process to remain asleep.
+ *
+ * Acquires the process's ->pi_lock and checks state. If the process
+ * is still blocked, returns @true and leave ->pi_lock held, otherwise
+ * releases ->pi_locked and returns @false.
+ */
+bool try_to_keep_sleeping(struct task_struct *p)
+{
+ lockdep_assert_irqs_enabled();
+ raw_spin_lock_irq(&p->pi_lock);
+ switch (p->state) {
+ case TASK_RUNNING:
+ case TASK_WAKING:
+ raw_spin_unlock_irq(&p->pi_lock);
+ return false;
+
+ default:
+ smp_rmb(); /* See comments in try_to_wake_up(). */
+ if (p->on_rq) {
+ raw_spin_unlock_irq(&p->pi_lock);
+ return false;
+ }
+ return true; /* Process is now stuck in blocked state. */
+ }
+ /* NOTREACHED */
+}
+
+/**
+ * allow_awake - Allow a kept-sleeping process to awaken
+ * @p: Process to be allowed to awaken.
+ *
+ * Given that @p was passed to an earlier call to try_to_keep_sleeping
+ * that returned @true, hence preventing @p from waking up, allow @p
+ * to once again be awakened.
+ */
+void allow_awake(struct task_struct *p)
+{
+ raw_spin_unlock_irq(&p->pi_lock);
+}
+
+/**
* wake_up_process - Wake up a specific process
* @p: The process to be woken up.
*
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-06 1:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-05 0:50 Paul E. McKenney
2020-03-05 3:52 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-03-05 4:25 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-03-05 8:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-03-05 8:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-03-05 14:01 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-03-05 14:22 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-03-05 14:28 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-03-05 15:36 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-03-06 1:40 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2020-03-06 16:56 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-03-06 21:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=20200306014027.GA11942@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72 \
--to=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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®