On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 01:31:39PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 02:33:58PM +0300, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
>
> > So, we move task_rq_lock() to sched.h, and dl_task_timer() uses it?
>
> Yep, like this. I've also modified your earlier patch to dl_task_time()
> back to its original form.
>
> ---
> Subject: sched: Make dl_task_time() use task_rq_lock()
> From: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org>
> Date: Tue Feb 17 13:22:25 CET 2015
>
> Kirill reported that a dl task can be throttled and dequeued at the
> same time. This happens, when it becomes throttled in schedule(),
> which is called to go to sleep:
>
> current->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
> schedule()
> deactivate_task()
> dequeue_task_dl()
> update_curr_dl()
> start_dl_timer()
> __dequeue_task_dl()
> prev->on_rq = 0;
>
> This invalidates the assumption from commit 0f397f2c90ce ("sched/dl:
> Fix race in dl_task_timer()"):
>
> "The only reason we don't strictly need ->pi_lock now is because
> we're guaranteed to have p->state == TASK_RUNNING here and are
> thus free of ttwu races".
>
> And therefore we have to use the full task_rq_lock() here.
>
> This further amends the fact that we forgot to update the rq lock loop
> for TASK_ON_RQ_MIGRATE, from commit cca26e8009d1 ("sched: Teach
> scheduler to understand TASK_ON_RQ_MIGRATING state").
>
> Reported-by: Kirill Tkhai <ktk...@parallels.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <pet...@infradead.org>
> ---
> kernel/sched/core.c | 76
> ------------------------------------------------
> kernel/sched/deadline.c | 12 +------
> kernel/sched/sched.h | 76
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 79 insertions(+), 85 deletions(-)
Duh, I put it under CONFIG_SMP, /me changes patch to not do this.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
