Re: [PATCH] sched: Avoid that __wait_on_bit_lock() hangs

[Bart Van Assche]

On 08/08/16 03:22, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> That would be the exact scenario I drew a picture of, no? I'm still
> failing to see the hole there.
> 
> Please draw a picture like that and illustrate the hole.
 
Hi Peter,

This is the sequence of which I think that it leads to the missed wakeup:

Task 1                    Task 2                    Task 3                    Task 4

lock_page()
 ...
                          lock_page_killable()
                           __lock_page_killable()
                            __wait_on_bit_lock()
                             bit_wait_io()
                              io_schedule()
                               ...
                                                                              lock_page()
                                                                               __lock_page()
                                                                                __wait_on_bit_lock()
                                                                                 bit_wait_io()
                                                                                  io_schedule()
                                                                                   ...


                                                    (signal delivery to task 2)
                                                    try_to_wake_up(task2, ..., ...)
                                                    (try_to_wake_up() returns 1)

unlock_page()
 wake_up_page()
  __wake_up_bit()
   __wake_up(wq, TASK_NORMAL, 1, &key)
    __wake_up_common(wq, mode=TASK_NORMAL, nr_exclusive=1, 0, key)
     wake_bit_function()
      autoremove_wake_function()
       default_wake_function()
        try_to_wake_up() <- skips task 2 because task 3 already changed
                            the task state of task 2
       (autoremove_wake_function() does not do
        list_del_init(&wait->task_list))


                              bit_wait_io() returns -EINTR
                             abort_exclusive_wait() is called by __wait_on_bit_lock()


In the above sequence task 1 does not remove task 2 from the waitqueue
because task 3 had already woken up task 2. The result is that when task 2
calls abort_exclusive_wait() that task 2 is still on the waitqueue. With the
current implementation of abort_exclusive_wait() in the above scenario task
4 is not woken up although it should be woken up. Hence the patch that removes
the "else" keyword from abort_exclusive_wait().

Bart.