LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: "Aneesh Kumar" <aneesh.kumar@gmail.com>
Cc: "Pavel Machek" <pavel@ucw.cz>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, ego@in.ibm.com, akpm@osdl.org,
mingo@elte.hu, vatsa@in.ibm.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] Freezer: Fix vfork problem
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 14:43:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200702251443.52339.rjw@sisk.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cc723f590702250501t7f920336hd383da3a703a99fa@mail.gmail.com>
On Sunday, 25 February 2007 14:01, Aneesh Kumar wrote:
> On 2/25/07, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > > Currently try_to_freeze_tasks() has to wait until all of the vforked processes
> > > exit and for this reason every user can make it fail. To fix this problem
> > > we can introduce the additional process flag PF_FREEZER_SKIP to be used by tasks
> > > that do not want to be counted as freezable by the freezer and want to have
> > > TIF_FREEZE set nevertheless. Then, this flag can be set by tasks using
> > > sys_vfork() before they call wait_for_completion() and cleared after they have
> > > woken up and called try_to_freeze(). In case such a task freezes with
> > > PF_FREEZER_SKIP set, refrigerator() clears this flag for the current task before
> > > calling frozen_process(current) to avoid having both PF_FREEZER_SKIP and
> > > PF_FROZEN set at the same time.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> >
> > > @@ -1393,7 +1394,9 @@ long do_fork(unsigned long clone_flags,
> > > tracehook_report_clone_complete(clone_flags, nr, p);
> > >
> > > if (clone_flags & CLONE_VFORK) {
> > > + freezer_do_not_count();
> > > wait_for_completion(&vfork);
> > > + freezer_count();
> > > tracehook_report_vfork_done(p, nr);
> > > }
> > > } else {
> >
> > All the infrastructure for this...Would it be easier to introduce
> >
> > void fastcall __sched wait_for_completion_freezeable(struct completion *x)
> > {
> > might_sleep();
> >
> > spin_lock_irq(&x->wait.lock);
> > if (!x->done) {
> > DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, current);
> >
> > wait.flags |= WQ_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE;
> > __add_wait_queue_tail(&x->wait, &wait);
> > do {
> > __set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
> > spin_unlock_irq(&x->wait.lock);
> > schedule();
> > try_to_freeze(); /* HERE */
> > spin_lock_irq(&x->wait.lock);
> > } while (!x->done);
> > __remove_wait_queue(&x->wait, &wait);
> > }
> > x->done--;
> > spin_unlock_irq(&x->wait.lock);
> > }
> >
> >
>
> I don't see a call to freezer_do_not_count here. Rafel was talking
> about a similar change but that would involve special cases in
> refrigerator such as wakeup parent if the process which is going to
> be frozen have vfork_done set.
>
> if (->vfork_done) {
> wakeup_parent()
> }
>
> how about
>
> void fastcall __sched wait_for_completion_freezeable(struct completion *x)
> {
> freezer_do_not_count();
> wait_for_completion(x);
> freezer_count();
> }
I think we can something like that on top of my original patch (or rather, the
patch that I've just sent in another message) if it's needed by anything else
than vfork.
Greetings,
Rafael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-25 13:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-02-23 10:16 [RFC][PATCH 0/7] Freezer: Hardening and preparation for CPU hotplug changes Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-23 10:18 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/7] Freezer: Read PF_BORROWED_MM in a nonracy way Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 10:43 ` Pavel Machek
2007-02-23 10:19 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/7] Freezer: Fix memory ordering in refrigerator Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-23 10:21 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/7] Freezer: Close theoretical race between refrigerator and thaw_tasks Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 10:44 ` Pavel Machek
2007-02-23 10:22 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/7] Freezer: Fix vfork problem Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 10:46 ` Pavel Machek
2007-02-25 10:45 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 12:59 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 14:33 ` Aneesh Kumar
2007-02-25 15:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 15:28 ` Aneesh Kumar
2007-02-25 15:40 ` Aneesh Kumar
2007-02-25 19:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 20:31 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-02-25 20:33 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 13:01 ` Aneesh Kumar
2007-02-25 13:43 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2007-02-23 10:23 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/7] Freezer: Remove PF_NOFREEZE from rcutorture thread Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 10:44 ` Pavel Machek
2007-02-23 10:25 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/7] Freezer: Remove PF_NOFREEZE from bluetooth threads Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 10:44 ` Pavel Machek
2007-02-25 23:53 ` Marcel Holtmann
2007-02-23 10:26 ` [RFC][PATCH 7/7] Freezer: Add try_to_freeze calls to all kernel threads Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-25 10:45 ` Pavel Machek
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=200702251443.52339.rjw@sisk.pl \
--to=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@gmail.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=vatsa@in.ibm.com \
--cc=venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com \
--subject='Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] Freezer: Fix vfork problem' \
/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).