stop_machine: Reflow cpu_stop_queue_two_works()
The code flow in cpu_stop_queue_two_works() is a little arcane; fix this by lifting the preempt_disable() to the top to create more natural nesting wrt the spinlocks and make the wake_up_q() and preempt_enable() unconditional at the end. Furthermore, enable preemption in the -EDEADLK case, such that we spin-wait with preemption enabled. Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Cc: isaacm@codeaurora.org Cc: matt@codeblueprint.co.uk Cc: psodagud@codeaurora.org Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: pkondeti@codeaurora.org Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180730112140.GH2494@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net
This commit is contained in:
parent
b6a60cf36d
commit
b80a2bfce8
|
@ -236,13 +236,24 @@ static int cpu_stop_queue_two_works(int cpu1, struct cpu_stop_work *work1,
|
|||
struct cpu_stopper *stopper2 = per_cpu_ptr(&cpu_stopper, cpu2);
|
||||
DEFINE_WAKE_Q(wakeq);
|
||||
int err;
|
||||
|
||||
retry:
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* The waking up of stopper threads has to happen in the same
|
||||
* scheduling context as the queueing. Otherwise, there is a
|
||||
* possibility of one of the above stoppers being woken up by another
|
||||
* CPU, and preempting us. This will cause us to not wake up the other
|
||||
* stopper forever.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
preempt_disable();
|
||||
raw_spin_lock_irq(&stopper1->lock);
|
||||
raw_spin_lock_nested(&stopper2->lock, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);
|
||||
|
||||
err = -ENOENT;
|
||||
if (!stopper1->enabled || !stopper2->enabled)
|
||||
if (!stopper1->enabled || !stopper2->enabled) {
|
||||
err = -ENOENT;
|
||||
goto unlock;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Ensure that if we race with __stop_cpus() the stoppers won't get
|
||||
* queued up in reverse order leading to system deadlock.
|
||||
|
@ -253,36 +264,30 @@ retry:
|
|||
* It can be falsely true but it is safe to spin until it is cleared,
|
||||
* queue_stop_cpus_work() does everything under preempt_disable().
|
||||
*/
|
||||
err = -EDEADLK;
|
||||
if (unlikely(stop_cpus_in_progress))
|
||||
goto unlock;
|
||||
if (unlikely(stop_cpus_in_progress)) {
|
||||
err = -EDEADLK;
|
||||
goto unlock;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
err = 0;
|
||||
__cpu_stop_queue_work(stopper1, work1, &wakeq);
|
||||
__cpu_stop_queue_work(stopper2, work2, &wakeq);
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* The waking up of stopper threads has to happen
|
||||
* in the same scheduling context as the queueing.
|
||||
* Otherwise, there is a possibility of one of the
|
||||
* above stoppers being woken up by another CPU,
|
||||
* and preempting us. This will cause us to n ot
|
||||
* wake up the other stopper forever.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
preempt_disable();
|
||||
|
||||
unlock:
|
||||
raw_spin_unlock(&stopper2->lock);
|
||||
raw_spin_unlock_irq(&stopper1->lock);
|
||||
|
||||
if (unlikely(err == -EDEADLK)) {
|
||||
preempt_enable();
|
||||
|
||||
while (stop_cpus_in_progress)
|
||||
cpu_relax();
|
||||
|
||||
goto retry;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
if (!err) {
|
||||
wake_up_q(&wakeq);
|
||||
preempt_enable();
|
||||
}
|
||||
wake_up_q(&wakeq);
|
||||
preempt_enable();
|
||||
|
||||
return err;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue