lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Mar]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: workqueue code needing preemption disabled
Hello, Steven.

On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 12:30:43PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> If you happen to know the critical areas that require preemption to be
> disabled for real, we can encapsulate them with:
>
> preempt_disable_rt();
>
> preempt_enable_rt();
>
> These are currently only in the -rt patch, but it annotates locations
> that require preemption to be disabled even when -rt converts spin_locks
> into mutexes. These obviously can not contain spin_locks() as
> spin_locks() can block and schedule out.

Making gcwq locks disable preemption would be much safer / easier, but
if that's not desirable, anything touching gcwq->idle_list would be a
good place to start - worker_enter_idle() and worker_leave_idle().
Hmmm... ignoring CPU hotplug, I think those two might just do it.
Give it a try? How reproducible is the problem?

Thanks.

--
tejun


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-03-18 21:44    [W:0.090 / U:1.068 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site