From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Spinlocks waiting with interrupts disabled / preempt disabled.
Date: Tue, 6 May 2008 12:26:18 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0805061220570.30604@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> (raw)
We just had a couple of cases of systems failing because interrrupts were
not serviced. Turned out that we were trying to acquire the treelock for
write while lots of readers where starving the writer a bit. A device
timed out before the write lock was acquired.
If interrupts would be enabled while busy waiting then such scenarios
could be avoided.
Could we make the wait cases more interrupt / preempt friendly by
reenabling interrupts / preempt while waiting? We had this interrupt
friendly behavior for a long time on IA64. If we have a special busy case
then we can also not use atomic ops and thus acquire the cacheline only
for read.
F.e.
Index: linux/kernel/spinlock.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/kernel/spinlock.c 2008-05-05 12:22:16.000000000 -0500
+++ linux/kernel/spinlock.c 2008-05-06 14:05:43.953016660 -0500
@@ -132,10 +132,14 @@ unsigned long __lockfunc _write_lock_irq
{
unsigned long flags;
+retry:
local_irq_save(flags);
- preempt_disable();
- _raw_write_lock(lock);
- return flags;
+ if (_write_trylock(lock))
+ return flags;
+ local_irq_restore(flags);
+ while (!write_can_lock(lock))
+ cpu_relax();
+ goto retry;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(_write_lock_irqsave);
next reply other threads:[~2008-05-06 19:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-06 19:26 Christoph Lameter [this message]
2008-05-07 7:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-05-07 17:04 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-05-07 17:24 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-05-07 18:49 ` Spinlocks: Factor our GENERIC_LOCKBREAK in order to avoid spin with irqs disable Christoph Lameter
2008-05-09 10:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-05-09 16:28 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-06-23 17:19 ` Petr Tesarik
2008-06-23 17:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-23 18:20 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-06-23 20:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-23 20:45 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-06-23 20:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-26 2:51 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-06-26 6:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-26 15:49 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-06-26 9:17 ` Petr Tesarik
2008-06-26 17:02 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-06-26 17:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-07-07 11:50 ` Nick Piggin
2008-07-07 11:52 ` Nick Piggin
2008-07-07 15:56 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-07-08 2:08 ` Nick Piggin
2008-07-07 15:53 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-07-07 19:46 ` Rik van Riel
2008-07-07 20:14 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-07-08 2:07 ` Nick Piggin
2008-07-08 5:57 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-07-08 8:41 ` Nick Piggin
2008-07-08 15:58 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-09 16:35 ` Spinlocks waiting with interrupts disabled / preempt disabled Olaf Weber
2008-05-09 17:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-09 18:00 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-05-09 18:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-09 20:01 ` Olaf Weber
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=Pine.LNX.4.64.0805061220570.30604@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com \
--to=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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®