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. 18 11月, 2010 1 次提交
    • P
      rcu: move TINY_RCU from softirq to kthread · b2c0710c
      由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于 
      If RCU priority boosting is to be meaningful, callback invocation must
be boosted in addition to preempted RCU readers.  Otherwise, in presence
of CPU real-time threads, the grace period ends, but the callbacks don't
get invoked.  If the callbacks don't get invoked, the associated memory
doesn't get freed, so the system is still subject to OOM.

But it is not reasonable to priority-boost RCU_SOFTIRQ, so this commit
moves the callback invocations to a kthread, which can be boosted easily.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      b2c0710c
  3. 08 10月, 2010 5 次提交
    • P
      rcu: add priority-inversion testing to rcutorture · 8e8be45e
      由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于 
      Add an optional test to force long-term preemption of RCU read-side
critical sections, controlled by new test_boost, test_boost_interval,
and test_boost_duration module parameters.  This is to be used to
test RCU priority boosting.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      8e8be45e
    • P
      sched: fix RCU lockdep splat from task_group() · 6506cf6c
      由 Peter Zijlstra 提交于 
      This addresses the following RCU lockdep splat:

[0.051203] CPU0: AMD QEMU Virtual CPU version 0.12.4 stepping 03
[0.052999] lockdep: fixing up alternatives.
[0.054105]
[0.054106] ===================================================
[0.054999] [ INFO: suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. ]
[0.054999] ---------------------------------------------------
[0.054999] kernel/sched.c:616 invoked rcu_dereference_check() without protection!
[0.054999]
[0.054999] other info that might help us debug this:
[0.054999]
[0.054999]
[0.054999] rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 1
[0.054999] 3 locks held by swapper/1:
[0.054999]  #0:  (cpu_add_remove_lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff814be933>] cpu_up+0x42/0x6a
[0.054999]  #1:  (cpu_hotplug.lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff810400d8>] cpu_hotplug_begin+0x2a/0x51
[0.054999]  #2:  (&rq->lock){-.-...}, at: [<ffffffff814be2f7>] init_idle+0x2f/0x113
[0.054999]
[0.054999] stack backtrace:
[0.054999] Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.35 #1
[0.054999] Call Trace:
[0.054999]  [<ffffffff81068054>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0x9b/0xa3
[0.054999]  [<ffffffff810325c3>] task_group+0x7b/0x8a
[0.054999]  [<ffffffff810325e5>] set_task_rq+0x13/0x40
[0.054999]  [<ffffffff814be39a>] init_idle+0xd2/0x113
[0.054999]  [<ffffffff814be78a>] fork_idle+0xb8/0xc7
[0.054999]  [<ffffffff81068717>] ? mark_held_locks+0x4d/0x6b
[0.054999]  [<ffffffff814bcebd>] do_fork_idle+0x17/0x2b
[0.054999]  [<ffffffff814bc89b>] native_cpu_up+0x1c1/0x724
[0.054999]  [<ffffffff814bcea6>] ? do_fork_idle+0x0/0x2b
[0.054999]  [<ffffffff814be876>] _cpu_up+0xac/0x127
[0.054999]  [<ffffffff814be946>] cpu_up+0x55/0x6a
[0.054999]  [<ffffffff81ab562a>] kernel_init+0xe1/0x1ff
[0.054999]  [<ffffffff81003854>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10
[0.054999]  [<ffffffff814c353c>] ? restore_args+0x0/0x30
[0.054999]  [<ffffffff81ab5549>] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x1ff
[0.054999]  [<ffffffff81003850>] ? kernel_thread_helper+0x0/0x10
[0.056074] Booting Node   0, Processors  #1lockdep: fixing up alternatives.
[0.130045]  #2lockdep: fixing up alternatives.
[0.203089]  #3 Ok.
[0.275286] Brought up 4 CPUs
[0.276005] Total of 4 processors activated (16017.17 BogoMIPS).

The cgroup_subsys_state structures referenced by idle tasks are never
freed, because the idle tasks should be part of the root cgroup,
which is not removable.

The problem is that while we do in-fact hold rq->lock, the newly spawned
idle thread's cpu is not yet set to the correct cpu so the lockdep check
in task_group():

  lockdep_is_held(&task_rq(p)->lock)

will fail.

But this is a chicken and egg problem.  Setting the CPU's runqueue requires
that the CPU's runqueue already be set.  ;-)

So insert an RCU read-side critical section to avoid the complaint.
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      6506cf6c
    • D
      rcu: using ACCESS_ONCE() to observe the jiffies_stall/rnp->qsmask value · 4ee0a603
      由 Dongdong Deng 提交于 
      Using ACCESS_ONCE() to observe the jiffies_stall/rnp->qsmask value
due to the caller didn't hold the root_rcu/rnp node's lock.  Although
use without ACCESS_ONCE() is safe due to the value loaded being used
but once, the ACCESS_ONCE() is a good documentation aid -- the variables
are being loaded without the services of a lock.
Signed-off-by: NDongdong Deng <dongdong.deng@windriver.com>
CC: Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>
CC: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      4ee0a603
    • P
      sched: suppress RCU lockdep splat in task_fork_fair · b0a0f667
      由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于 
      > ===================================================
> [ INFO: suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. ]
> ---------------------------------------------------
> /home/greearb/git/linux.wireless-testing/kernel/sched.c:618 invoked rcu_dereference_check() without protection!
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 1
> 1 lock held by ifup/23517:
>   #0:  (&rq->lock){-.-.-.}, at: [<c042f782>] task_fork_fair+0x3b/0x108
>
> stack backtrace:
> Pid: 23517, comm: ifup Not tainted 2.6.36-rc6-wl+ #5
> Call Trace:
>   [<c075e219>] ? printk+0xf/0x16
>   [<c0455842>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0x74/0x7d
>   [<c0426854>] task_group+0x6d/0x79
>   [<c042686e>] set_task_rq+0xe/0x57
>   [<c042f79e>] task_fork_fair+0x57/0x108
>   [<c042e965>] sched_fork+0x82/0xf9
>   [<c04334b3>] copy_process+0x569/0xe8e
>   [<c0433ef0>] do_fork+0x118/0x262
>   [<c076302f>] ? do_page_fault+0x16a/0x2cf
>   [<c044b80c>] ? up_read+0x16/0x2a
>   [<c04085ae>] sys_clone+0x1b/0x20
>   [<c04030a5>] ptregs_clone+0x15/0x30
>   [<c0402f1c>] ? sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x38

Here a newly created task is having its runqueue assigned.  The new task
is not yet on the tasklist, so cannot go away.  This is therefore a false
positive, suppress with an RCU read-side critical section.

Reported-by: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Tested-by: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com
      b0a0f667
    • P
      net: suppress RCU lockdep false positive in sock_update_classid · 1144182a
      由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于 
      > ===================================================
> [ INFO: suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. ]
> ---------------------------------------------------
> include/linux/cgroup.h:542 invoked rcu_dereference_check() without protection!
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
>
> rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 0
> 1 lock held by swapper/1:
>  #0:  (net_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff813e9010>]
> register_pernet_subsys+0x1f/0x47
>
> stack backtrace:
> Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.35.4-28.fc14.x86_64 #1
> Call Trace:
>  [<ffffffff8107bd3a>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0xaa/0xb3
>  [<ffffffff813e04b9>] sock_update_classid+0x7c/0xa2
>  [<ffffffff813e054a>] sk_alloc+0x6b/0x77
>  [<ffffffff8140b281>] __netlink_create+0x37/0xab
>  [<ffffffff813f941c>] ? rtnetlink_rcv+0x0/0x2d
>  [<ffffffff8140cee1>] netlink_kernel_create+0x74/0x19d
>  [<ffffffff8149c3ca>] ? __mutex_lock_common+0x339/0x35b
>  [<ffffffff813f7e9c>] rtnetlink_net_init+0x2e/0x48
>  [<ffffffff813e8d7a>] ops_init+0xe9/0xff
>  [<ffffffff813e8f0d>] register_pernet_operations+0xab/0x130
>  [<ffffffff813e901f>] register_pernet_subsys+0x2e/0x47
>  [<ffffffff81db7bca>] rtnetlink_init+0x53/0x102
>  [<ffffffff81db835c>] netlink_proto_init+0x126/0x143
>  [<ffffffff81db8236>] ? netlink_proto_init+0x0/0x143
>  [<ffffffff810021b8>] do_one_initcall+0x72/0x186
>  [<ffffffff81d78ebc>] kernel_init+0x23b/0x2c9
>  [<ffffffff8100aae4>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10
>  [<ffffffff8149e2d0>] ? restore_args+0x0/0x30
>  [<ffffffff81d78c81>] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x2c9
>  [<ffffffff8100aae0>] ? kernel_thread_helper+0x0/0x10

The sock_update_classid() function calls task_cls_classid(current),
but the calling task cannot go away, so there is no danger of
the associated structures disappearing.  Insert an RCU read-side
critical section to suppress the false positive.
Reported-by: NSubrata Modak <subrata@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      1144182a
  5. 07 10月, 2010 7 次提交
  7. 06 10月, 2010 6 次提交
  9. 05 10月, 2010 21 次提交