LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Denis V. Lunev" <den@sw.ru>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vatsa <vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: lock_task_group_list() can be called from the atomic context
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 11:42:57 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1202805777.13118.26.camel@iris.sw.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1202736830.6247.4.camel@lappy>

Acked-by: Denis V. Lunev <den@openvz.org>

On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 14:33 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 15:09 +0300, Denis V. Lunev wrote:
> 
> Curious, I hadn't yet seen it... Does the below fix it?
> 
> > BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context
> > at /home/den/src/linux-netns26/kernel/mutex.c:209
> > in_atomic():1, irqs_disabled():0
> > no locks held by swapper/0.
> > Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.24 #304
> > 
> > Call Trace:
> >  <IRQ>  [<ffffffff80252d1e>] ? __debug_show_held_locks+0x15/0x27
> >  [<ffffffff8022c2a8>] __might_sleep+0xc0/0xdf
> >  [<ffffffff8049f1df>] mutex_lock_nested+0x28/0x2a9
> >  [<ffffffff80231294>] sched_destroy_group+0x18/0xea
> >  [<ffffffff8023e835>] sched_destroy_user+0xd/0xf
> >  [<ffffffff8023e8c1>] free_uid+0x8a/0xab
> >  [<ffffffff80233e24>] __put_task_struct+0x3f/0xd3
> >  [<ffffffff80236708>] delayed_put_task_struct+0x23/0x25
> >  [<ffffffff8026fda7>] __rcu_process_callbacks+0x8d/0x215
> >  [<ffffffff8026ff52>] rcu_process_callbacks+0x23/0x44
> >  [<ffffffff8023a2ae>] __do_softirq+0x79/0xf8
> >  [<ffffffff8020f8c3>] ? profile_pc+0x2a/0x67
> >  [<ffffffff8020d38c>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x30
> >  [<ffffffff8020f689>] do_softirq+0x61/0x9c
> >  [<ffffffff8023a233>] irq_exit+0x51/0x53
> >  [<ffffffff8021bd1a>] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x77/0xad
> >  [<ffffffff8020ce3b>] apic_timer_interrupt+0x6b/0x70
> >  <EOI>  [<ffffffff8020b0dd>] ? default_idle+0x43/0x76
> >  [<ffffffff8020b0db>] ? default_idle+0x41/0x76
> >  [<ffffffff8020b09a>] ? default_idle+0x0/0x76
> >  [<ffffffff8020b186>] ? cpu_idle+0x76/0x98
> 
> separate the tg->shares protection from the task_group lock.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
> ---
>  kernel/sched.c |   37 +++++++++++++++++--------------------
>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
> 
> Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched.c
> +++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
> @@ -232,10 +232,10 @@ static struct cfs_rq *init_cfs_rq_p[NR_C
>  static struct sched_rt_entity *init_sched_rt_entity_p[NR_CPUS];
>  static struct rt_rq *init_rt_rq_p[NR_CPUS];
>  
> -/* task_group_mutex serializes add/remove of task groups and also changes to
> +/* task_group_lock serializes add/remove of task groups and also changes to
>   * a task group's cpu shares.
>   */
> -static DEFINE_MUTEX(task_group_mutex);
> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(task_group_lock);
>  
>  /* doms_cur_mutex serializes access to doms_cur[] array */
>  static DEFINE_MUTEX(doms_cur_mutex);
> @@ -295,16 +295,6 @@ static inline void set_task_rq(struct ta
>  	p->rt.parent = task_group(p)->rt_se[cpu];
>  }
>  
> -static inline void lock_task_group_list(void)
> -{
> -	mutex_lock(&task_group_mutex);
> -}
> -
> -static inline void unlock_task_group_list(void)
> -{
> -	mutex_unlock(&task_group_mutex);
> -}
> -
>  static inline void lock_doms_cur(void)
>  {
>  	mutex_lock(&doms_cur_mutex);
> @@ -318,8 +308,6 @@ static inline void unlock_doms_cur(void)
>  #else
>  
>  static inline void set_task_rq(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int cpu) { }
> -static inline void lock_task_group_list(void) { }
> -static inline void unlock_task_group_list(void) { }
>  static inline void lock_doms_cur(void) { }
>  static inline void unlock_doms_cur(void) { }
>  
> @@ -7571,6 +7559,7 @@ struct task_group *sched_create_group(vo
>  	struct rt_rq *rt_rq;
>  	struct sched_rt_entity *rt_se;
>  	struct rq *rq;
> +	unsigned long flags;
>  	int i;
>  
>  	tg = kzalloc(sizeof(*tg), GFP_KERNEL);
> @@ -7620,7 +7609,7 @@ struct task_group *sched_create_group(vo
>  		init_tg_rt_entry(rq, tg, rt_rq, rt_se, i, 0);
>  	}
>  
> -	lock_task_group_list();
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&task_group_lock, flags);
>  	for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
>  		rq = cpu_rq(i);
>  		cfs_rq = tg->cfs_rq[i];
> @@ -7629,7 +7618,7 @@ struct task_group *sched_create_group(vo
>  		list_add_rcu(&rt_rq->leaf_rt_rq_list, &rq->leaf_rt_rq_list);
>  	}
>  	list_add_rcu(&tg->list, &task_groups);
> -	unlock_task_group_list();
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&task_group_lock, flags);
>  
>  	return tg;
>  
> @@ -7650,9 +7639,10 @@ void sched_destroy_group(struct task_gro
>  {
>  	struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq = NULL;
>  	struct rt_rq *rt_rq = NULL;
> +	unsigned long flags;
>  	int i;
>  
> -	lock_task_group_list();
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&task_group_lock, flags);
>  	for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
>  		cfs_rq = tg->cfs_rq[i];
>  		list_del_rcu(&cfs_rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list);
> @@ -7660,7 +7650,7 @@ void sched_destroy_group(struct task_gro
>  		list_del_rcu(&rt_rq->leaf_rt_rq_list);
>  	}
>  	list_del_rcu(&tg->list);
> -	unlock_task_group_list();
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&task_group_lock, flags);
>  
>  	BUG_ON(!cfs_rq);
>  
> @@ -7728,13 +7718,16 @@ static void set_se_shares(struct sched_e
>  	}
>  }
>  
> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(shares_mutex);
> +
>  int sched_group_set_shares(struct task_group *tg, unsigned long shares)
>  {
>  	int i;
>  	struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq;
>  	struct rq *rq;
> +	unsigned long flags;
>  
> -	lock_task_group_list();
> +	mutex_lock(&shares_mutex);
>  	if (tg->shares == shares)
>  		goto done;
>  
> @@ -7746,10 +7739,12 @@ int sched_group_set_shares(struct task_g
>  	 * load_balance_fair) from referring to this group first,
>  	 * by taking it off the rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list on each cpu.
>  	 */
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&task_group_lock, flags);
>  	for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
>  		cfs_rq = tg->cfs_rq[i];
>  		list_del_rcu(&cfs_rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list);
>  	}
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&task_group_lock, flags);
>  
>  	/* wait for any ongoing reference to this group to finish */
>  	synchronize_sched();
> @@ -7769,13 +7764,15 @@ int sched_group_set_shares(struct task_g
>  	 * Enable load balance activity on this group, by inserting it back on
>  	 * each cpu's rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list.
>  	 */
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&task_group_lock, flags);
>  	for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
>  		rq = cpu_rq(i);
>  		cfs_rq = tg->cfs_rq[i];
>  		list_add_rcu(&cfs_rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list, &rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list);
>  	}
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&task_group_lock, flags);
>  done:
> -	unlock_task_group_list();
> +	mutex_unlock(&shares_mutex);
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> 
> 


      reply	other threads:[~2008-02-12  8:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-02-11 12:09 Denis V. Lunev
2008-02-11 13:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-02-12  8:42   ` Denis V. Lunev [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=1202805777.13118.26.camel@iris.sw.ru \
    --to=den@sw.ru \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --subject='Re: lock_task_group_list() can be called from the atomic context' \
    /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

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).