Re: Q: a bogus task_running() check in try_to_wake_up() ?

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 07/17, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > try_to_wake_up:
> > 	
> > 	if (p->se.on_rq)
> > 		goto out_running;
> > 
> > 	...
> > 
> > 	if (unlikely(task_running(rq, p)))
> > 		goto out_activate;
> > 
> > How it possible that rq->curr has on_rq == 0 ?
> > 
> > AFAICS, this can only happen if this task is rq->idle. But idle 
> > threads should not sleep, we have a special "scheduling from the idle 
> > thread!" check in schedule().
> 
> it's also possible if an arch uses __ARCH_WANT_INTERRUPTS_ON_CTXSW, 
> right?

Ah, got it. I guess you meant __ARCH_WANT_UNLOCKED_CTXSW though.

In that case schedule() drops rq->lock before the context switch, but doesn't
clear ->oncpu. So, task_running(p) means we must not activate "p" on another
CPU, otherwise it could be scheduled before the switch-in-progress completes.

Thanks a lot!

Oleg.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/