mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
	Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched: Consider task_struct::saved_state in wait_task_inactive().
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2022 11:18:20 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xhsmhsfmodvo3.mognet@vschneid.remote.csb> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Yt+G/somh8qcKc/R@linutronix.de>

On 26/07/22 08:17, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2022-07-25 18:47:58 [+0100], Valentin Schneider wrote:
>> > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
>> > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
>> > @@ -3257,6 +3257,40 @@ int migrate_swap(struct task_struct *cur
>> >  }
>> >  #endif /* CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING */
>> >
>> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
>>
>> Would something like the below be useful?
>>
>> /*
>>  * If p->saved_state is anything else than TASK_RUNNING, then p blocked on an
>>  * rtlock *before* voluntarily calling into schedule() after setting its state
>>  * to X. For things like ptrace (X=TASK_TRACED), the task could have more work
>>  * to do upon acquiring the lock before whoever called wait_task_inactive()
>>  * should return. IOW, we have to wait for:
>>  *
>>  *   p.saved_state = TASK_RUNNING
>>  *   p.__state     = X
>>  *
>>  * which implies the task isn't blocked on an RT lock and got to schedule() by
>>  * itself.
>>  *
>>  * Also see comments in ttwu_state_match().
>>  */
>
> This sums up the code. I would s/schedule/schedule_rtlock/ since there
> are two entrypoints.

Right, this any better?

/*
 * Consider:
 *
 *  set_special_state(X);
 *
 *  do_things()
 *    // Somewhere in there is an rtlock that can be contended:
 *    current_save_and_set_rtlock_wait_state();
 *    [...]
 *    schedule_rtlock(); (A)
 *    [...]
 *    current_restore_rtlock_saved_state();
 *
 *  schedule(); (B)
 *
 * If p->saved_state is anything else than TASK_RUNNING, then p blocked on an
 * rtlock (A) *before* voluntarily calling into schedule() (B) after setting its
 * state to X. For things like ptrace (X=TASK_TRACED), the task could have more
 * work to do upon acquiring the lock in do_things() before whoever called
 * wait_task_inactive() should return. IOW, we have to wait for:
 *
 *   p.saved_state = TASK_RUNNING
 *   p.__state     = X
 *
 * which implies the task isn't blocked on an RT lock and got to schedule() (B).
 *
 * Also see comments in ttwu_state_match().
 */


  reply	other threads:[~2022-07-26 10:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-07-20 15:44 [PATCH 0/2] signal: Last two bits for PREEMPT_RT Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2022-07-20 15:44 ` [PATCH 1/2] signal: Don't disable preemption in ptrace_stop() on PREEMPT_RT Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2022-07-20 15:44 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched: Consider task_struct::saved_state in wait_task_inactive() Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2022-07-25 17:47   ` Valentin Schneider
2022-07-26  6:17     ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2022-07-26 10:18       ` Valentin Schneider [this message]
2022-07-26 13:16         ` [PATCH 2/2 v2] " Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2022-07-25 15:46 ` [PATCH 0/2] signal: Last two bits for PREEMPT_RT Sebastian Andrzej Siewior

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=xhsmhsfmodvo3.mognet@vschneid.remote.csb \
    --to=vschneid@redhat.com \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=bristot@redhat.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --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®