From: Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>
To: Jon Kohler <jon@nutanix.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: hoist ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_WRITER(p->on_rq) above WRITE_ONCE
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 13:57:55 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241114185755.GG471026@pauld.westford.csb> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241114165352.1824956-1-jon@nutanix.com>
On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 09:53:52AM -0700 Jon Kohler wrote:
> In {activate|deactivate}_task(), hoist ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_WRITER() to be
> above WRITE_ONCE(p->on_rq), which matches the ordering listed in the
> KCSAN documentation, kcsan-checks.h code comments, and the usage
> pattern we already have in __block_task().
>
> Signed-off-by: Jon Kohler <jon@nutanix.com>
> ---
> kernel/sched/core.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index a1c353a62c56..80a04c36b495 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -2066,16 +2066,16 @@ void activate_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
>
> enqueue_task(rq, p, flags);
>
> - WRITE_ONCE(p->on_rq, TASK_ON_RQ_QUEUED);
> ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_WRITER(p->on_rq);
> + WRITE_ONCE(p->on_rq, TASK_ON_RQ_QUEUED);
> }
>
> void deactivate_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
> {
> SCHED_WARN_ON(flags & DEQUEUE_SLEEP);
>
> - WRITE_ONCE(p->on_rq, TASK_ON_RQ_MIGRATING);
> ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_WRITER(p->on_rq);
> + WRITE_ONCE(p->on_rq, TASK_ON_RQ_MIGRATING);
>
> /*
> * Code explicitly relies on TASK_ON_RQ_MIGRATING begin set *before*
> --
> 2.43.0
>
>
This looks fine to me and it makes sense to have the assert before the
write. A quick grep showed that this is by no means a universal pattern
at the moment.
Reviewed-by: Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>
Cheers,
Phil
--
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-14 18:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-11-14 16:53 Jon Kohler
2024-11-14 18:57 ` Phil Auld [this message]
2024-11-14 19:01 ` Jon Kohler
2024-11-14 19:20 ` Phil Auld
2024-11-15 9:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-11-15 14:26 ` Phil Auld
2024-11-15 17:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20241114185755.GG471026@pauld.westford.csb \
--to=pauld@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=jon@nutanix.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 \
--cc=vschneid@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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®