lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Dec]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [patch V2 4/9] softirq: Make softirq control and processing RT aware
Date
On Wed, Dec 09 2020 at 11:11, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 06:01:55PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>> + /* First entry of a task into a BH disabled section? */
>> + if (!current->softirq_disable_cnt) {
>> + if (preemptible()) {
>> + local_lock(&softirq_ctrl.lock);
>
> AFAICT this significantly changes the locking rules.
>
> Where previously we could do:
>
> spin_lock(&ponies)
> spin_lock_bh(&foo);
>
> vs
>
> spin_lock_bh(&bar);
> spin_lock(&ponies)
>
> provided the rest of the code observed: bar -> ponies -> foo
> and never takes ponies from in-softirq.
>
> This is now a genuine deadlock on RT.

I know, but making this work is trying to square the circle.

Any approach we tried before going this way had worse problems than
this particular limitation.

> Also see:
>
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/X9CheYjuXWc75Spa@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net

I'm aware of that and it's fortunately not that many instances of this.

Thanks,

tglx

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-12-09 13:39    [W:0.165 / U:0.420 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site