Reply-To: xlpang@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline/rtmutex: Fix a PI crash for deadline tasks
References: <56FE685E.6080001@redhat.com>
 <19912883-8AB1-4DFD-A0E1-F23057785243@infradead.org>
 <56FE78E0.5060504@redhat.com> <20160401215143.GB2906@worktop>
 <57037974.1020002@redhat.com>
 <20160405091954.GI3448@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20160405092954.GC24771@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20160408122510.15978179@gandalf.local.home> <20160408173835.GC1087@worktop>
 <20160408145055.13c98a75@gandalf.local.home>
 <20160408185916.GQ3448@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20160408151542.24328fd6@gandalf.local.home>
 <20160408152801.3f0b1c33@gandalf.local.home>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
From: Xunlei Pang <xpang@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <570876A3.3000704@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2016 11:27:31 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160408152801.3f0b1c33@gandalf.local.home>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1244
Lines: 31

On 2016/04/09 at 03:28, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 15:15:42 -0400
> Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
>> From what I understand, the slowfn() modifies the task pi_list (or
>> rbtree, as it is today). As this is an unlock, the task being woken
>> (the next one to grab the lock) is removed from the previous task's pi
>> list.
>>
>> In rt_mutex_adjust_prio(current) I see it simply grabs current's
>> pi_lock and calls __rt_mutex_adjust_prio(current). This calls
>> rt_mutex_getprio(current) which returns current's normal prio if it
>> doesn't have any pi waiters, or it looks at the top pi waiter on the
>> tasks list and returns that. Which wouldn't be the task on wake_q,
>> otherwise we wouldn't be deboosting in the first place.
>>
> OK, I now see that the your previous patch is changing what I'm looking
> at :-) This is what happens when you go away and try to catch up on
> email and not read the emails by threads. I see the
> rt_mutex_adjust_prio() is being changed.
>
> I'll go back and look at your previous patch (as I looked at that while
> traveling and didn't think too hard about it).

Sorry for that, I should add more comments about it, will add more next version.

Regards,
Xunlei

>
> -- Steve