Re: [PATCH] qrwlock: Fix bug in interrupt handling code

[Waiman Long]

On 04/09/2015 04:14 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 04:07:55PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> > The qrwlock is fair in the process context, but becoming unfair when
> > in the interrupt context to support use cases like the tasklist_lock.
> > However, the unfair code in the interrupt context has problem that
> > may cause deadlock.
> >
> > The fast path increments the reader count. In the interrupt context,
> > the reader in the slowpath will wait until the writer release the
> > lock. However, if other readers have the lock and the writer is just
> > in the waiting mode. It will never get the write lock because the
> > that interrupt context reader has increment the count. This will
> > cause deadlock.
> >
> > This patch fixes this problem by checking the state of the
> > reader/writer count retrieved at the fast path. If the writer
> > is in waiting mode, the reader will get the lock immediately and
> > return. Otherwise, it will wait until the writer release the lock
> > like before.
> A little word on how you found this issue would be nice.

It is not found by testing. I didn't see any problem with a running 
Linux kernel so far.

I am in the process of trying to make the qrwlock lock unfair in virt. 
When I inspect the code, I found out that the interrupt code didn't look 
right. That is why I send out a patch to fix that.

Regards,
Longman
--
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/