From: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>,
longman@redhat.com, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] futex: don't retry futex_wait() with stale uaddr/val after spurious wakeup
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2019 08:16:59 -0500 (EST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <524359139.10936023.1573132619485.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1911070009040.1869@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
My apologies for the 'word salad'.
> So you go great length to "fix" the spurious wakeup case, but what happens if
> there is an actual signal?
>
> It will return to handle the signal and then run into the exactly same
> situation because it restarts the syscall with the original uaddr1/uval,
> right?
Right, I missed that.
>
> That means that the shortcut which was added in commit d58e6576b0de
> ("futex: Handle spurious wake up") is equivalent to the actual signal case.
>
> So the above churn is pretty pointless because it "fixes" not even half of
> the problem and you can't fix the -ERESTARTSYS case at all.
>
> IIRC the uaddr1 value is supposed to change on a requeue operation so that
> a late incoming waiter goes back with -EWOULDBLOCK. And excatly the same
> would happen on the retry.
>
> Aside of that you are completely failing to explain in which context you
> observe this problem. Is that failing on libc, some test case or some other
> maybe experimental code?
It's test case (LTP futex_cmp_requeue01), which keeps uaddr1 value same
across requeue, and then sporadically fails to wake up some child processes.
>
> If there is an actual use case for keeping the uaddr1 value the same across
> a requeue..
It seems both I and test author missed some hint at man page
for FUTEX_CMP_REQUEUE and assumed this was valid use case.
> But let's talk about that once you came up with a proper explanation for
> what you are trying to solve and why you think it's correct.
Thank you for the detailed response.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-07 13:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-06 22:43 Jan Stancek
2019-11-07 11:11 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-07 13:16 ` Jan Stancek [this message]
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=524359139.10936023.1573132619485.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com \
--to=jstancek@redhat.com \
--cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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®