lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jun]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
SubjectRe: [BUG] While changing the cpufreq governor, kernel hits a bug in workqueue.c
Date
Hi,

Nageswara R Sastry <rnsastry@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:

> Hi,
>
> While changing the cpufreq governor with the following script for
> about 30 minutes, the kernel hits a BUG in workqueue.c. Detailed
> trace attached.
>
> Script:
> #!/bin/bash
>
> while [ 1 ]
> do
> for govnrs in ondemand conservative
> do
> for cpu in 0 1 2 3
> do
> echo $govnrs > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu${cpu}/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> if ! [ -d /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu${cpu}/cpufreq/${govnrs} ] ; then
> echo "Error: Enable to create dir $govnrs"
> fi
> done
> done
> done
>
> Kernel stack trace:
> ------------[ cut here ]------------
> kernel BUG at kernel/workqueue.c:223!
> invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP
> Modules linked in: cpufreq_powersave cpufreq_conservative
> cpufreq_userspace usb_storage usbhid ehci_hcd ohci_hcd uhci_hcd
> usbcore
>
> Pid: 232, comm: kondemand/1 Not tainted (2.6.25.7 #1)
> EIP: 0060:[<c012f61a>] EFLAGS: 00010286 CPU: 1
> EIP is at queue_delayed_work_on+0x20/0x97
> EAX: 00000000 EBX: c483ba94 ECX: c483ba94 EDX: 00000000
> ESI: c483bab0 EDI: f7a3f708 EBP: 00000001 ESP: f7a69f40
> DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 0000 SS: 0068
> Process kondemand/1 (pid: 232, ti=f7a68000 task=f794d020 task.ti=f7a68000)
> Stack: 00000000 f7a3e7b0 c483ba80 f7ab5e98 c041e54d 00000040 00000000
> 00000001
> 00000040 00000246 00000000 00000002 00000000 c012ee7f c483ba98
> f7a3e7b0
> c483ba94 f7a69f9c c012eeba 00000000 00000002 c012ee7f c041e31e
> c099e2a8
> Call Trace:
> [<c041e54d>] do_dbs_timer+0x22f/0x24f
> [<c012ee7f>] run_workqueue+0x81/0x187
> [<c012eeba>] run_workqueue+0xbc/0x187
> [<c012ee7f>] run_workqueue+0x81/0x187
> [<c041e31e>] do_dbs_timer+0x0/0x24f
> [<c012f6fa>] worker_thread+0x0/0xbd
> [<c012f7ad>] worker_thread+0xb3/0xbd
> [<c0131acc>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x2d
> [<c0131a1b>] kthread+0x38/0x5d
> [<c01319e3>] kthread+0x0/0x5d
> [<c0105527>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10
> =======================
> Code: c3 a1 dc da 6a c0 e9 78 ff ff ff 55 89 c5 57 89 d7 56 53 89 cb
> 8d 71 1c f0 0f ba 29 00 19 c0 31 d2 85 c0 75 76 83 79 1c 00 74 04 <0f>
> 0b eb fe 8d 41 04 39 41 04 74 04 0f 0b eb fe 89 f8 64 8b 15
> EIP: [<c012f61a>] queue_delayed_work_on+0x20/0x97 SS:ESP 0068:f7a69f40
> ---[ end trace 40ca209e9f1ab79d ]---

Added Dave Jones to CC.

The work seems to be queued twice. Might there be a race in the
activation of the governor?

proc #0 proc #1

if (this_dbs_info->enable == 0)
<PREEMPTED>
if (this_dbs_info->enable == 0)
mutex_lock()
dbs_timer_init()
queue_delayed_work_on()
mutex_unlock()
...
mutex_lock()
dbs_timer_init()
queue_delayed_work_on()

If that might happen, would it be feasible to put the check for ->enable
within the mutex-protection?

Hannes

---
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de>
Subject: cpufreq: Fix race in enabling ondemand/conservative governors

Prevent double activation of the governor if two processes race on the
check for whether the governor is already active.

Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de>
---

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
index 5d3a04b..a4902e4 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
@@ -486,10 +486,11 @@ static int cpufreq_governor_dbs(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
if ((!cpu_online(cpu)) || (!policy->cur))
return -EINVAL;

- if (this_dbs_info->enable) /* Already enabled */
- break;
-
mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
+ if (this_dbs_info->enable) {
+ mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
+ break;
+ }

rc = sysfs_create_group(&policy->kobj, &dbs_attr_group);
if (rc) {
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c
index d2af20d..61705e1 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c
@@ -508,10 +508,12 @@ static int cpufreq_governor_dbs(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
if ((!cpu_online(cpu)) || (!policy->cur))
return -EINVAL;

- if (this_dbs_info->enable) /* Already enabled */
+ mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
+ if (this_dbs_info->enable) {
+ mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
break;
+ }

- mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
dbs_enable++;

rc = sysfs_create_group(&policy->kobj, &dbs_attr_group);

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-06-23 17:31    [W:0.064 / U:0.064 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site