Skip to content

cloud-kernel
cloud-kernel

openanolis / cloud-kernel
1 年多 前同步成功

通知 160
Star 36
Fork 7
cloud-kernel
cloud-kernel
切换分支/标签
  1. 31 12月, 2011 11 次提交
  3. 30 12月, 2011 1 次提交
    • M
      Merge tag 'v3.2-rc7' into staging/for_v3.3 · b4d48c94
      由 Mauro Carvalho Chehab 提交于 
      Linux 3.2-rc7

* tag 'v3.2-rc7': (1304 commits)
  Linux 3.2-rc7
  netfilter: xt_connbytes: handle negation correctly
  Btrfs: call d_instantiate after all ops are setup
  Btrfs: fix worker lock misuse in find_worker
  net: relax rcvbuf limits
  rps: fix insufficient bounds checking in store_rps_dev_flow_table_cnt()
  net: introduce DST_NOPEER dst flag
  mqprio: Avoid panic if no options are provided
  bridge: provide a mtu() method for fake_dst_ops
  md/bitmap: It is OK to clear bits during recovery.
  md: don't give up looking for spares on first failure-to-add
  md/raid5: ensure correct assessment of drives during degraded reshape.
  md/linear: fix hot-add of devices to linear arrays.
  sparc64: Fix MSIQ HV call ordering in pci_sun4v_msiq_build_irq().
  pata_of_platform: Add missing CONFIG_OF_IRQ dependency.
  ipv4: using prefetch requires including prefetch.h
  VFS: Fix race between CPU hotplug and lglocks
  vfs: __read_cache_page should use gfp argument rather than GFP_KERNEL
  USB: Fix usb/isp1760 build on sparc
  net: Add a flow_cache_flush_deferred function
  ...

Conflicts:
	drivers/media/common/tuners/tda18218.c
	drivers/media/video/omap3isp/ispccdc.c
	drivers/staging/media/as102/as102_drv.h
      b4d48c94
  5. 24 12月, 2011 9 次提交
  7. 23 12月, 2011 18 次提交
  9. 22 12月, 2011 1 次提交
    • S
      VFS: Fix race between CPU hotplug and lglocks · e30e2fdf
      由 Srivatsa S. Bhat 提交于 
      Currently, the *_global_[un]lock_online() routines are not at all synchronized
with CPU hotplug. Soft-lockups detected as a consequence of this race was
reported earlier at https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/8/24/185. (Thanks to Cong Meng
for finding out that the root-cause of this issue is the race condition
between br_write_[un]lock() and CPU hotplug, which results in the lock states
getting messed up).

Fixing this race by just adding {get,put}_online_cpus() at appropriate places
in *_global_[un]lock_online() is not a good option, because, then suddenly
br_write_[un]lock() would become blocking, whereas they have been kept as
non-blocking all this time, and we would want to keep them that way.

So, overall, we want to ensure 3 things:
1. br_write_lock() and br_write_unlock() must remain as non-blocking.
2. The corresponding lock and unlock of the per-cpu spinlocks must not happen
   for different sets of CPUs.
3. Either prevent any new CPU online operation in between this lock-unlock, or
   ensure that the newly onlined CPU does not proceed with its corresponding
   per-cpu spinlock unlocked.

To achieve all this:
(a) We introduce a new spinlock that is taken by the *_global_lock_online()
    routine and released by the *_global_unlock_online() routine.
(b) We register a callback for CPU hotplug notifications, and this callback
    takes the same spinlock as above.
(c) We maintain a bitmap which is close to the cpu_online_mask, and once it is
    initialized in the lock_init() code, all future updates to it are done in
    the callback, under the above spinlock.
(d) The above bitmap is used (instead of cpu_online_mask) while locking and
    unlocking the per-cpu locks.

The callback takes the spinlock upon the CPU_UP_PREPARE event. So, if the
br_write_lock-unlock sequence is in progress, the callback keeps spinning,
thus preventing the CPU online operation till the lock-unlock sequence is
complete. This takes care of requirement (3).

The bitmap that we maintain remains unmodified throughout the lock-unlock
sequence, since all updates to it are managed by the callback, which takes
the same spinlock as the one taken by the lock code and released only by the
unlock routine. Combining this with (d) above, satisfies requirement (2).

Overall, since we use a spinlock (mentioned in (a)) to prevent CPU hotplug
operations from racing with br_write_lock-unlock, requirement (1) is also
taken care of.

By the way, it is to be noted that a CPU offline operation can actually run
in parallel with our lock-unlock sequence, because our callback doesn't react
to notifications earlier than CPU_DEAD (in order to maintain our bitmap
properly). And this means, since we use our own bitmap (which is stale, on
purpose) during the lock-unlock sequence, we could end up unlocking the
per-cpu lock of an offline CPU (because we had locked it earlier, when the
CPU was online), in order to satisfy requirement (2). But this is harmless,
though it looks a bit awkward.
Debugged-by: NCong Meng <mc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: NSrivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
      e30e2fdf