Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751765Ab1FTOym (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jun 2011 10:54:42 -0400 Received: from na3sys009aog111.obsmtp.com ([74.125.149.205]:38659 "EHLO na3sys009aog111.obsmtp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751592Ab1FTOyl (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jun 2011 10:54:41 -0400 Message-ID: <4DFF5F29.2000904@ti.com> Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 20:24:33 +0530 From: Santosh Shilimkar User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Russell King - ARM Linux CC: Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] ARM: smp: Fix the CPU hotplug race with scheduler. References: <1308561839-18407-1-git-send-email-santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> <20110620095053.GA2082@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20110620101438.GD2082@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4DFF20B3.7010209@ti.com> <20110620104415.GF2082@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4DFF255E.5030308@ti.com> <20110620111336.GG2082@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4DFF2E37.8030602@ti.com> <20110620114019.GH2082@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20110620142338.GL2082@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20110620142338.GL2082@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3259 Lines: 93 On 6/20/2011 7:53 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 12:40:19PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> Ok. So loops_per_jiffy must be too small. My guess is you're using an >> older kernel without 71c696b1 (calibrate: extract fall-back calculation >> into own helper). > > Right, this commit above helps show the problem - and it's fairly subtle. > > It's a race condition. Let's first look at the spinlock debugging code. > It does this: > > static void __spin_lock_debug(raw_spinlock_t *lock) > { > u64 i; > u64 loops = loops_per_jiffy * HZ; > > for (;;) { > for (i = 0; i< loops; i++) { > if (arch_spin_trylock(&lock->raw_lock)) > return; > __delay(1); > } > /* print warning */ > } > } > > If loops_per_jiffy is zero, we never try to grab the spinlock, because > we never enter the inner for loop. We immediately print a warning, > and re-execute the outer loop for ever, resulting in the CPU locking up > in this condition. > > In theory, we should never see a zero loops_per_jiffy value, because it > represents the number of loops __delay() needs to delay by one jiffy and > clearly zero makes no sense. > > However, calibrate_delay() does this (which x86 and ARM call on secondary > CPU startup): > > calibrate_delay() > { > ... > if (preset_lpj) { > } else if ((!printed)&& lpj_fine) { > } else if ((loops_per_jiffy = calibrate_delay_direct()) != 0) { > } else { > /* approximation/convergence stuff */ > } > } > > Now, before 71c696b, this used to be: > > } else { > loops_per_jiffy = (1<<12); > > So the window between calibrate_delay_direct() returning and setting > loops_per_jiffy to zero, and the re-initialization of loops_per_jiffy > was relatively short (maybe even the compiler optimized away the zero > write.) > > However, after 71c696b, this now does: > > } else { > if (!printed) > pr_info("Calibrating delay loop... "); > + loops_per_jiffy = calibrate_delay_converge(); > > So, as loops_per_jiffy is not local to this function, the compiler has > to write out that zero value, before calling calibrate_delay_converge(), > and loops_per_jiffy only becomes non-zero _after_ calibrate_delay_converge() > has returned. This opens the window and allows the spinlock debugging > code to explode. > > This patch closes the window completely, by only writing to loops_per_jiffy > only when we have a real value for it. > > This allows me to boot 3.0.0-rc3 on Versatile Express (4 CPU) whereas > without this it fails with spinlock lockup and rcu problems. > > init/calibrate.c | 14 ++++++++------ > 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > I am away from my board now. Will test this change. btw, the online-active race is still open even with this patch close and should be fixed. Regards Santosh -- 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/