Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1397258

Re: [PATCH 2/4] locking/rwsem: Drop superfluous waiter refcount

From Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH 2/4] locking/rwsem: Drop superfluous waiter refcount
Date 2016-05-09 21:10 +0200
Message-ID <rwYJ4-3ca-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References (1 earlier) <rwLCa-5YS-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <rwNXl-n9-49@gated-at.bofh.it> <rwVLb-f9-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <rwW4y-Lb-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <rwYzo-2MP-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 11:51:18AM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Mon, 09 May 2016, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> >>>So I think you're wrong here; imagine this:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>	rwsem_down_read_failed()			rwsem_wake()
> >>>	  get_task_struct();
> >>>	  raw_spin_lock_irq(&wait_lock);
> >>>	  list_add_tail(&waiter.list, &wait_list);
> >>>	  raw_spin_unlock_irq(&wait_lock);
> >>>							  raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&wait_lock)
> >>>							  __rwsem_do_wake()
> >>>	  while (true) {
> >>>	    set_task_state(tsk, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
> >>>							    waiter->task = NULL
> >>>	    if (!waiter.task) // true
> >>>	      break;
> >>>
> >>>	  __set_task_state(tsk, TASK_RUNNING);
> >>>
> >>>	do_exit();
> >>>							    wake_up_process(tsk); /* BOOM */
> >>
> >>I may be missing something, but rwsem_down_read_failed() will not return until
> >>after the wakeup is done by the rwsem_wake() thread.
> >
> >The above never gets to schedule(), and even if it did, a spurious
> >wakeup could've happened, no?
> 
> Ah indeed, you are most certainly correct. For some reason  I was always
> considering schedule() in the picture. Hmm I'll have to think about this
> some more, but given the small chance of a waiter actually seeing the nil
> task at the first iteration I'm wondering if we could just invert the code
> and call schedule() before the task check. Saving the refcounts will serve
> _all_ reader waiters otoh, but this would obviously need numbers...

So with where you're going -- using wake_q, it naturally goes away if
you do:

	wake_q_add(&wake_q, tsk);
	smp_store_release(&waiter->task, NULL);

Because the wake_q already takes a task ref, and we'll not actually
issue the wakeup until after the waiter->task store.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[PATCH -tip 0/4] locking/rwsem (xadd): Reader waiter optimizations Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-05-09 07:00 +0200
  [PATCH 4/4] locking/rwsem: Rework zeroing reader waiter->task Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-05-09 07:10 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 4/4] locking/rwsem: Rework zeroing reader waiter->task Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-09 10:00 +0200
  [PATCH 3/4] locking/rwsem: Enable lockless waiter wakeup(s) Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-05-09 07:10 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 3/4] locking/rwsem: Enable lockless waiter wakeup(s) Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-09 09:50 +0200
  [PATCH 2/4] locking/rwsem: Drop superfluous waiter refcount Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-05-09 07:10 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 2/4] locking/rwsem: Drop superfluous waiter refcount Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-09 09:40 +0200
      Re: [PATCH 2/4] locking/rwsem: Drop superfluous waiter refcount Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-05-09 18:00 +0200
        Re: [PATCH 2/4] locking/rwsem: Drop superfluous waiter refcount Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-09 18:20 +0200
          Re: [PATCH 2/4] locking/rwsem: Drop superfluous waiter refcount Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-05-09 21:00 +0200
            Re: [PATCH 2/4] locking/rwsem: Drop superfluous waiter refcount Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-09 21:10 +0200
  [PATCH 1/4] locking/rwsem: Avoid stale ->count for rwsem_down_write_failed() Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-05-09 07:10 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 1/4] locking/rwsem: Avoid stale ->count for  rwsem_down_write_failed() Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com> - 2016-05-09 07:40 +0200
      Re: [PATCH 1/4] locking/rwsem: Avoid stale ->count for  rwsem_down_write_failed() Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-09 09:20 +0200
      Re: [PATCH 1/4] locking/rwsem: Avoid stale ->count for  rwsem_down_write_failed() Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-05-09 16:40 +0200
  Re: [PATCH -tip 0/4] locking/rwsem (xadd): Reader waiter optimizations Waiman Long <waiman.long@hpe.com> - 2016-05-10 03:40 +0200

csiph-web