Message ID | 1681264483-5208-1-git-send-email-zhouzhouyi@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Headers | show |
Series | rcu/torture replace wait_event with wait_event_interruptible | expand |
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 09:54:43AM +0800, zhouzhouyi@gmail.com wrote: > From: Zhouyi Zhou <zhouzhouyi@gmail.com> > > In kfree_rcu_test, kfree_scale_shutdown will be detected as hung task > if kfree_loops is too big. Replace wait_event with wait_event_interruptible > to avoid false positive. > > Tested in the PPC VM of Open Source Lab of Oregon State University. > > Signed-off-by: Zhouyi Zhou <zhouzhouyi@gmail.com> > --- > kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c b/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c > index 91fb5905a008..b37eec94957c 100644 > --- a/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c > +++ b/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c > @@ -771,7 +771,7 @@ kfree_scale_cleanup(void) > static int > kfree_scale_shutdown(void *arg) > { > - wait_event(shutdown_wq, > + wait_event_interruptible(shutdown_wq, Good catch!!! Would wait_event_idle() work in this case? The _interruptible() variant indicates that wakeups due to things like POSIX signals is permitted. Thanx, Paul > atomic_read(&n_kfree_scale_thread_ended) >= kfree_nrealthreads); > > smp_mb(); /* Wake before output. */ > -- > 2.34.1 >
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 12:54 PM Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 09:54:43AM +0800, zhouzhouyi@gmail.com wrote: > > From: Zhouyi Zhou <zhouzhouyi@gmail.com> > > > > In kfree_rcu_test, kfree_scale_shutdown will be detected as hung task > > if kfree_loops is too big. Replace wait_event with wait_event_interruptible > > to avoid false positive. > > > > Tested in the PPC VM of Open Source Lab of Oregon State University. > > > > Signed-off-by: Zhouyi Zhou <zhouzhouyi@gmail.com> > > --- > > kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c b/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c > > index 91fb5905a008..b37eec94957c 100644 > > --- a/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c > > +++ b/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c > > @@ -771,7 +771,7 @@ kfree_scale_cleanup(void) > > static int > > kfree_scale_shutdown(void *arg) > > { > > - wait_event(shutdown_wq, > > + wait_event_interruptible(shutdown_wq, > > Good catch!!! > > Would wait_event_idle() work in this case? The _interruptible() > variant indicates that wakeups due to things like POSIX signals is > permitted. Thank Paul for your guidance and encouragement! I will perform a new round of rcu torture test, after this is done, I will resend the modified version. Thanks ;-) Zhouyi > > Thanx, Paul > > > atomic_read(&n_kfree_scale_thread_ended) >= kfree_nrealthreads); > > > > smp_mb(); /* Wake before output. */ > > -- > > 2.34.1 > >
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c b/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c index 91fb5905a008..b37eec94957c 100644 --- a/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c +++ b/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c @@ -771,7 +771,7 @@ kfree_scale_cleanup(void) static int kfree_scale_shutdown(void *arg) { - wait_event(shutdown_wq, + wait_event_interruptible(shutdown_wq, atomic_read(&n_kfree_scale_thread_ended) >= kfree_nrealthreads); smp_mb(); /* Wake before output. */