Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1244178
| From | Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched: select_task_rq() should check cpu_active() like select_fallback_rq() |
| Date | 2015-10-11 20:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <qitei-7DS-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qi7x8-15U-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <qi7x8-15U-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 10/10, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> I do not understand the cpu_active() check in select_fallback_rq().
> x86 doesn't need it, and the recent commit dd9d3843755d "sched: Fix
> cpu_active_mask/cpu_online_mask race" documents the fact that on any
> architecture we can ignore !active starting from CPU_ONLINE stage.
>
> But any possible reason why do we need this check in "fallback" must
> equally apply to select_task_rq().
And I still think this is true, select_task_rq() and select_fallback_rq()
should use the same check in any case...
> +static inline bool cpu_allowed(int cpu)
> +{
> + return cpu_online(cpu) && cpu_active(cpu);
> +}
...
> @@ -1390,7 +1391,7 @@ int select_task_rq(struct task_struct *p, int cpu, int sd_flags, int wake_flags)
> * not worry about this generic constraint ]
> */
> if (unlikely(!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, tsk_cpus_allowed(p)) ||
> - !cpu_online(cpu)))
> + !cpu_allowed(cpu)))
> cpu = select_fallback_rq(task_cpu(p), p);
But as Fengguang reports (thanks a lot!) this change is wrong. It leads
to another BUG_ON(td->cpu != smp_processor_id()) before ht->park(td->cpu)
in smpboot_thread_fn().
I should have realized this. smpboot_park_threads() is called after
CPU_DOWN_PREPARE. And this can break other PF_NO_SETAFFINITY threads.
Perhaps I am totally confused, but to me this looks like another
indication that select_fallback_rq() should not check cpu_active(),
or at least this needs some changes...
Oleg.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH 1/3] sched: select_task_rq() should check cpu_active() like select_fallback_rq() Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-10-10 21:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched: select_task_rq() should check cpu_active() like select_fallback_rq() Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-10-11 20:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched: select_task_rq() should check cpu_active() like select_fallback_rq() Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2015-10-11 21:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched: select_task_rq() should check cpu_active() like select_fallback_rq() Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-10-12 14:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched: select_task_rq() should check cpu_active() like select_fallback_rq() Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-10-12 19:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched: select_task_rq() should check cpu_active() like select_fallback_rq() Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-10-14 17:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched: select_task_rq() should check cpu_active() like select_fallback_rq() Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-10-14 22:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched: select_task_rq() should check cpu_active() like select_fallback_rq() Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-10-14 22:40 +0200
csiph-web