Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752826AbaLJANc (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Dec 2014 19:13:32 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:58015 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751642AbaLJANb (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Dec 2014 19:13:31 -0500 Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2014 01:12:39 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov To: David Hildenbrand Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, peterz@infradead.org, bp@suse.de, jkosina@suse.cz Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] CPU hotplug: active_writer not woken up in some cases - deadlock Message-ID: <20141210001239.GA516@redhat.com> References: <1418127811-22629-1-git-send-email-dahi@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1418127811-22629-1-git-send-email-dahi@linux.vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org (sorry if this was already discussed, I ignored most of my emails I got this week) On 12/09, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > @@ -116,7 +118,13 @@ void put_online_cpus(void) > if (cpu_hotplug.active_writer == current) > return; > if (!mutex_trylock(&cpu_hotplug.lock)) { > + /* inc before testing for active_writer to not lose wake ups */ > atomic_inc(&cpu_hotplug.puts_pending); > + spin_lock(&cpu_hotplug.awr_lock); > + /* we might be the last one */ > + if (unlikely(cpu_hotplug.active_writer)) > + wake_up_process(cpu_hotplug.active_writer); > + spin_unlock(&cpu_hotplug.awr_lock); Not sure I understand. awr_lock can only ensure that active_writer can't go away. Why active_writer should see .puts_pending != 0 if this is called right after cpu_hotplug_begin() takes cpu_hotplug.lock but before it sets TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE? IOW, > void cpu_hotplug_begin(void) > { > + spin_lock(&cpu_hotplug.awr_lock); > cpu_hotplug.active_writer = current; > + spin_unlock(&cpu_hotplug.awr_lock); > > cpuhp_lock_acquire(); > for (;;) { > mutex_lock(&cpu_hotplug.lock); > + __set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE); don't we need set_current_state() here ? Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/