Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761635AbYBLItV (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Feb 2008 03:49:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754658AbYBLItN (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Feb 2008 03:49:13 -0500 Received: from mailhub.sw.ru ([195.214.232.25]:12713 "EHLO relay.sw.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755080AbYBLItM (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Feb 2008 03:49:12 -0500 Subject: Re: lock_task_group_list() can be called from the atomic context From: "Denis V. Lunev" To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vatsa In-Reply-To: <1202736830.6247.4.camel@lappy> References: <1202731747.13118.20.camel@iris.sw.ru> <1202736830.6247.4.camel@lappy> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Parallels Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 11:42:57 +0300 Message-Id: <1202805777.13118.26.camel@iris.sw.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 6462 Lines: 189 Acked-by: Denis V. Lunev On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 14:33 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 15:09 +0300, Denis V. Lunev wrote: > > Curious, I hadn't yet seen it... Does the below fix it? > > > BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context > > at /home/den/src/linux-netns26/kernel/mutex.c:209 > > in_atomic():1, irqs_disabled():0 > > no locks held by swapper/0. > > Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.24 #304 > > > > Call Trace: > > [] ? __debug_show_held_locks+0x15/0x27 > > [] __might_sleep+0xc0/0xdf > > [] mutex_lock_nested+0x28/0x2a9 > > [] sched_destroy_group+0x18/0xea > > [] sched_destroy_user+0xd/0xf > > [] free_uid+0x8a/0xab > > [] __put_task_struct+0x3f/0xd3 > > [] delayed_put_task_struct+0x23/0x25 > > [] __rcu_process_callbacks+0x8d/0x215 > > [] rcu_process_callbacks+0x23/0x44 > > [] __do_softirq+0x79/0xf8 > > [] ? profile_pc+0x2a/0x67 > > [] call_softirq+0x1c/0x30 > > [] do_softirq+0x61/0x9c > > [] irq_exit+0x51/0x53 > > [] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x77/0xad > > [] apic_timer_interrupt+0x6b/0x70 > > [] ? default_idle+0x43/0x76 > > [] ? default_idle+0x41/0x76 > > [] ? default_idle+0x0/0x76 > > [] ? cpu_idle+0x76/0x98 > > separate the tg->shares protection from the task_group lock. > > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra > --- > kernel/sched.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++-------------------- > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) > > Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c > =================================================================== > --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched.c > +++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c > @@ -232,10 +232,10 @@ static struct cfs_rq *init_cfs_rq_p[NR_C > static struct sched_rt_entity *init_sched_rt_entity_p[NR_CPUS]; > static struct rt_rq *init_rt_rq_p[NR_CPUS]; > > -/* task_group_mutex serializes add/remove of task groups and also changes to > +/* task_group_lock serializes add/remove of task groups and also changes to > * a task group's cpu shares. > */ > -static DEFINE_MUTEX(task_group_mutex); > +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(task_group_lock); > > /* doms_cur_mutex serializes access to doms_cur[] array */ > static DEFINE_MUTEX(doms_cur_mutex); > @@ -295,16 +295,6 @@ static inline void set_task_rq(struct ta > p->rt.parent = task_group(p)->rt_se[cpu]; > } > > -static inline void lock_task_group_list(void) > -{ > - mutex_lock(&task_group_mutex); > -} > - > -static inline void unlock_task_group_list(void) > -{ > - mutex_unlock(&task_group_mutex); > -} > - > static inline void lock_doms_cur(void) > { > mutex_lock(&doms_cur_mutex); > @@ -318,8 +308,6 @@ static inline void unlock_doms_cur(void) > #else > > static inline void set_task_rq(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int cpu) { } > -static inline void lock_task_group_list(void) { } > -static inline void unlock_task_group_list(void) { } > static inline void lock_doms_cur(void) { } > static inline void unlock_doms_cur(void) { } > > @@ -7571,6 +7559,7 @@ struct task_group *sched_create_group(vo > struct rt_rq *rt_rq; > struct sched_rt_entity *rt_se; > struct rq *rq; > + unsigned long flags; > int i; > > tg = kzalloc(sizeof(*tg), GFP_KERNEL); > @@ -7620,7 +7609,7 @@ struct task_group *sched_create_group(vo > init_tg_rt_entry(rq, tg, rt_rq, rt_se, i, 0); > } > > - lock_task_group_list(); > + spin_lock_irqsave(&task_group_lock, flags); > for_each_possible_cpu(i) { > rq = cpu_rq(i); > cfs_rq = tg->cfs_rq[i]; > @@ -7629,7 +7618,7 @@ struct task_group *sched_create_group(vo > list_add_rcu(&rt_rq->leaf_rt_rq_list, &rq->leaf_rt_rq_list); > } > list_add_rcu(&tg->list, &task_groups); > - unlock_task_group_list(); > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&task_group_lock, flags); > > return tg; > > @@ -7650,9 +7639,10 @@ void sched_destroy_group(struct task_gro > { > struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq = NULL; > struct rt_rq *rt_rq = NULL; > + unsigned long flags; > int i; > > - lock_task_group_list(); > + spin_lock_irqsave(&task_group_lock, flags); > for_each_possible_cpu(i) { > cfs_rq = tg->cfs_rq[i]; > list_del_rcu(&cfs_rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list); > @@ -7660,7 +7650,7 @@ void sched_destroy_group(struct task_gro > list_del_rcu(&rt_rq->leaf_rt_rq_list); > } > list_del_rcu(&tg->list); > - unlock_task_group_list(); > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&task_group_lock, flags); > > BUG_ON(!cfs_rq); > > @@ -7728,13 +7718,16 @@ static void set_se_shares(struct sched_e > } > } > > +static DEFINE_MUTEX(shares_mutex); > + > int sched_group_set_shares(struct task_group *tg, unsigned long shares) > { > int i; > struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq; > struct rq *rq; > + unsigned long flags; > > - lock_task_group_list(); > + mutex_lock(&shares_mutex); > if (tg->shares == shares) > goto done; > > @@ -7746,10 +7739,12 @@ int sched_group_set_shares(struct task_g > * load_balance_fair) from referring to this group first, > * by taking it off the rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list on each cpu. > */ > + spin_lock_irqsave(&task_group_lock, flags); > for_each_possible_cpu(i) { > cfs_rq = tg->cfs_rq[i]; > list_del_rcu(&cfs_rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list); > } > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&task_group_lock, flags); > > /* wait for any ongoing reference to this group to finish */ > synchronize_sched(); > @@ -7769,13 +7764,15 @@ int sched_group_set_shares(struct task_g > * Enable load balance activity on this group, by inserting it back on > * each cpu's rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list. > */ > + spin_lock_irqsave(&task_group_lock, flags); > for_each_possible_cpu(i) { > rq = cpu_rq(i); > cfs_rq = tg->cfs_rq[i]; > list_add_rcu(&cfs_rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list, &rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list); > } > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&task_group_lock, flags); > done: > - unlock_task_group_list(); > + mutex_unlock(&shares_mutex); > return 0; > } > > > -- 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/