From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, will@kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk, cl@rock-chips.com, ke.wang@unisoc.com,
shakeelb@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-team@android.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] kthread: break dependency between worker->lock and task_struct->pi_lock
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 18:31:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200428163125.GC16910@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200427184358.191624-1-surenb@google.com>
On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 11:43:58AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> A number of kthread-related functions indirectly take task_struct->pi_lock
> while holding worker->lock in the call chain like this:
> spin_lock(&worker->lock)
> kthread_insert_work
> wake_up_process
> try_to_wake_up
> raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&p->pi_lock, flags)
>
> This lock dependency exists whenever kthread_insert_work is called either
> directly or indirectly via __kthread_queue_delayed_work in the following
> functions:
> kthread_queue_work
> kthread_delayed_work_timer_fn
> kthread_queue_delayed_work
> kthread_flush_work
> kthread_mod_delayed_work
>
> This creates possibilities for circular dependencies like the one reported
> at: https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/4/24/954
Please, do not use lkml.org links.
Also, ideally, we'd pull that kthread_queue_delayed_work() out from
under rq->lock.
In fact, looking at it, WTH is the delayed branch of
kthread_queue_delayed_work() under that lock? That whole
delayed_work_list thing smells like bong-hits.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-28 16:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-27 18:43 [PATCH 1/1] kthread: break dependency between worker->lock and task_struct->pi_lock Suren Baghdasaryan
2020-04-28 16:31 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2020-04-28 18:04 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2020-04-30 17:57 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200428163125.GC16910@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk \
--cc=cl@rock-chips.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=ke.wang@unisoc.com \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).