Calling freeze_processes sets a global flag that will cause any
process that calls try_to_freeze to enter the refrigerator. It
skips sending a signal to the current task, but if the current
task ever hits try_to_freeze all threads will be frozen and the
system will deadlock.
Set a new flag, PF_SUSPEND_TASK, on the task that calls
freeze_processes. The flag notifies the freezer that the thread
is involved in suspend and should not be frozen. Also add a
WARN_ON in thaw_processes if the caller does not have the
PF_SUSPEND_TASK flag set to catch if a different task calls
thaw_processes than the one that called freeze_processes, leaving
a task with PF_SUSPEND_TASK permanently set on it.
Threads that spawn off a task with PF_SUSPEND_TASK set (which
swsusp does) will also have PF_SUSPEND_TASK set, preventing them
from freezing while they are helping with suspend, but they need
to be dead by the time suspend is triggered, otherwise they may
run when userspace is expected to be frozen. Add a WARN_ON in
thaw_processes if more than one thread has the PF_SUSPEND_TASK
flag set.
Reported-by: Michael Leun <[email protected]>
Tested-by: Michael Leun <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Colin Cross <[email protected]>
---
Resending not as an attachment for review.
If the extra process flag is considered too precious for this
(there are only 2 left after this patch) I could get the
same functionality by having freeze_processes() reject calls
from a PF_KTHREAD|PF_NOFREEZE thread, and use PF_KTHREAD to
determine if PF_NOFREEZE should be cleared in thaw_processes().
include/linux/sched.h | 1 +
kernel/freezer.c | 2 +-
kernel/power/process.c | 11 +++++++++++
3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
index 50d04b9..d722490 100644
--- a/include/linux/sched.h
+++ b/include/linux/sched.h
@@ -1628,6 +1628,7 @@ extern void thread_group_cputime_adjusted(struct task_struct *p, cputime_t *ut,
#define PF_MEMPOLICY 0x10000000 /* Non-default NUMA mempolicy */
#define PF_MUTEX_TESTER 0x20000000 /* Thread belongs to the rt mutex tester */
#define PF_FREEZER_SKIP 0x40000000 /* Freezer should not count it as freezable */
+#define PF_SUSPEND_TASK 0x80000000 /* this thread called freeze_processes and should not be frozen */
/*
* Only the _current_ task can read/write to tsk->flags, but other
diff --git a/kernel/freezer.c b/kernel/freezer.c
index 8b2afc1..b462fa1 100644
--- a/kernel/freezer.c
+++ b/kernel/freezer.c
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(freezer_lock);
*/
bool freezing_slow_path(struct task_struct *p)
{
- if (p->flags & PF_NOFREEZE)
+ if (p->flags & (PF_NOFREEZE | PF_SUSPEND_TASK))
return false;
if (pm_nosig_freezing || cgroup_freezing(p))
diff --git a/kernel/power/process.c b/kernel/power/process.c
index fc0df84..06ec886 100644
--- a/kernel/power/process.c
+++ b/kernel/power/process.c
@@ -109,6 +109,8 @@ static int try_to_freeze_tasks(bool user_only)
/**
* freeze_processes - Signal user space processes to enter the refrigerator.
+ * The current thread will not be frozen. The same process that calls
+ * freeze_processes must later call thaw_processes.
*
* On success, returns 0. On failure, -errno and system is fully thawed.
*/
@@ -120,6 +122,9 @@ int freeze_processes(void)
if (error)
return error;
+ /* Make sure this task doesn't get frozen */
+ current->flags |= PF_SUSPEND_TASK;
+
if (!pm_freezing)
atomic_inc(&system_freezing_cnt);
@@ -168,6 +173,7 @@ int freeze_kernel_threads(void)
void thaw_processes(void)
{
struct task_struct *g, *p;
+ struct task_struct *curr = current;
if (pm_freezing)
atomic_dec(&system_freezing_cnt);
@@ -182,10 +188,15 @@ void thaw_processes(void)
read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
do_each_thread(g, p) {
+ /* No other threads should have PF_SUSPEND_TASK set */
+ WARN_ON((p != curr) && (p->flags & PF_SUSPEND_TASK));
__thaw_task(p);
} while_each_thread(g, p);
read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
+ WARN_ON(!(curr->flags & PF_SUSPEND_TASK));
+ curr->flags &= ~PF_SUSPEND_TASK;
+
usermodehelper_enable();
schedule();
--
1.8.3
On Wednesday, July 24, 2013 05:41:33 PM Colin Cross wrote:
> Calling freeze_processes sets a global flag that will cause any
> process that calls try_to_freeze to enter the refrigerator. It
> skips sending a signal to the current task, but if the current
> task ever hits try_to_freeze all threads will be frozen and the
> system will deadlock.
>
> Set a new flag, PF_SUSPEND_TASK, on the task that calls
> freeze_processes. The flag notifies the freezer that the thread
> is involved in suspend and should not be frozen. Also add a
> WARN_ON in thaw_processes if the caller does not have the
> PF_SUSPEND_TASK flag set to catch if a different task calls
> thaw_processes than the one that called freeze_processes, leaving
> a task with PF_SUSPEND_TASK permanently set on it.
>
> Threads that spawn off a task with PF_SUSPEND_TASK set (which
> swsusp does) will also have PF_SUSPEND_TASK set, preventing them
> from freezing while they are helping with suspend, but they need
> to be dead by the time suspend is triggered, otherwise they may
> run when userspace is expected to be frozen. Add a WARN_ON in
> thaw_processes if more than one thread has the PF_SUSPEND_TASK
> flag set.
>
> Reported-by: Michael Leun <[email protected]>
> Tested-by: Michael Leun <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Colin Cross <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> Resending not as an attachment for review.
I like this, but I wonder what other people think.
> If the extra process flag is considered too precious for this
> (there are only 2 left after this patch) I could get the
> same functionality by having freeze_processes() reject calls
> from a PF_KTHREAD|PF_NOFREEZE thread, and use PF_KTHREAD to
> determine if PF_NOFREEZE should be cleared in thaw_processes().
Can we spend an extra process flag on that?
Rafael
> include/linux/sched.h | 1 +
> kernel/freezer.c | 2 +-
> kernel/power/process.c | 11 +++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index 50d04b9..d722490 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -1628,6 +1628,7 @@ extern void thread_group_cputime_adjusted(struct task_struct *p, cputime_t *ut,
> #define PF_MEMPOLICY 0x10000000 /* Non-default NUMA mempolicy */
> #define PF_MUTEX_TESTER 0x20000000 /* Thread belongs to the rt mutex tester */
> #define PF_FREEZER_SKIP 0x40000000 /* Freezer should not count it as freezable */
> +#define PF_SUSPEND_TASK 0x80000000 /* this thread called freeze_processes and should not be frozen */
>
> /*
> * Only the _current_ task can read/write to tsk->flags, but other
> diff --git a/kernel/freezer.c b/kernel/freezer.c
> index 8b2afc1..b462fa1 100644
> --- a/kernel/freezer.c
> +++ b/kernel/freezer.c
> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(freezer_lock);
> */
> bool freezing_slow_path(struct task_struct *p)
> {
> - if (p->flags & PF_NOFREEZE)
> + if (p->flags & (PF_NOFREEZE | PF_SUSPEND_TASK))
> return false;
>
> if (pm_nosig_freezing || cgroup_freezing(p))
> diff --git a/kernel/power/process.c b/kernel/power/process.c
> index fc0df84..06ec886 100644
> --- a/kernel/power/process.c
> +++ b/kernel/power/process.c
> @@ -109,6 +109,8 @@ static int try_to_freeze_tasks(bool user_only)
>
> /**
> * freeze_processes - Signal user space processes to enter the refrigerator.
> + * The current thread will not be frozen. The same process that calls
> + * freeze_processes must later call thaw_processes.
> *
> * On success, returns 0. On failure, -errno and system is fully thawed.
> */
> @@ -120,6 +122,9 @@ int freeze_processes(void)
> if (error)
> return error;
>
> + /* Make sure this task doesn't get frozen */
> + current->flags |= PF_SUSPEND_TASK;
> +
> if (!pm_freezing)
> atomic_inc(&system_freezing_cnt);
>
> @@ -168,6 +173,7 @@ int freeze_kernel_threads(void)
> void thaw_processes(void)
> {
> struct task_struct *g, *p;
> + struct task_struct *curr = current;
>
> if (pm_freezing)
> atomic_dec(&system_freezing_cnt);
> @@ -182,10 +188,15 @@ void thaw_processes(void)
>
> read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
> do_each_thread(g, p) {
> + /* No other threads should have PF_SUSPEND_TASK set */
> + WARN_ON((p != curr) && (p->flags & PF_SUSPEND_TASK));
> __thaw_task(p);
> } while_each_thread(g, p);
> read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
>
> + WARN_ON(!(curr->flags & PF_SUSPEND_TASK));
> + curr->flags &= ~PF_SUSPEND_TASK;
> +
> usermodehelper_enable();
>
> schedule();
>
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 1:06 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Can we spend an extra process flag on that?
I suspect we can. But if somebody hollers later, we'll need to do some
compaction..
Linus
On Thursday, July 25, 2013 04:51:20 PM Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 1:06 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Can we spend an extra process flag on that?
>
> I suspect we can. But if somebody hollers later, we'll need to do some
> compaction..
OK, if we need that flag for something more important, it shouldn't be too
difficult to recycle.
And I'm not seeing any complaints, so I'm going to fast-track this, as it
fixes a recent regression.
Rafael