On Wednesday, 21 February 2007 22:06, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 11:03:14PM +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 02/21, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wednesday, 21 February 2007 19:14, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 07:29:01PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, 20 February 2007 01:32, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > > On Tuesday, 20 February 2007 01:12, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > > > > Hm. In the case discussed above we have a task that's right before calling
> > > > > > frozen_process(), so we can't thaw it, because it's not frozen. It will be
> > > > > > frozen just in a while, but try_to_freeze_tasks() and thaw_tasks() have no
> > > > > > way to check this.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think to close this race the refrigerator should check TIF_FREEZE and set
> > > > > > PF_FROZEN _and_ reset TIF_FREEZE under a lock
> >
> > I personally think this is good. Not only this allows us to close the race,
> > I think we can do more.
> >
> > > that would also have to be
> > > > > > taken by try_to_freeze_tasks() in the beginning of the error path. This will
> > > > > > ensure that all tasks either freeze themselves before the error path in
> > > > > > try_to_freeze_tasks() is executed, or remain unfrozen.
> >
> > How about take this lock in thaw_tasks() instead/too ?
> >
> > Currently we need a separate loop in thaw_tasks() to handle PF_FREEZER_SKIP. This
> > means that PF_FREEZER_SKIP is not so generic: thaw_tasks() can't tolerate if such
> > a task was woken in between. What if we change thaw_process() to clear TIF_FREEZE ?
> >
> > Note also that we can use task_lock() instead of global refrigerator_lock. This
> > means that thaw_process() should take it too, probably this is slowdown, but I
> > think not too much because thaw_process() is going to write to p->flags anyway.
> > In this case thaw_process() works perfectly as cancel_freezing_and_thaw() and
> > can be used to fix exec/coredump in future.
>
> This sounds much better than a a global lock to me! ;-)
Okay, below is what I have right now (compilation tested on x86_64):
This patch fixes the vfork problem by adding the PF_FREEZER_SKIP flag that
can be used by tasks to tell the freezer not to count them as freezeable and
making the vfork parents set this flag before they call wait_for_completion().
Secondly, it fixes the race which happens it a task with TIF_FREEZE set is
preempted right before calling frozen_process() in refrigerator() and stays
unforzen until after thaw_tasks() runs and checks its status. For this purpose
task_lock() is used.
include/linux/freezer.h | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
include/linux/sched.h | 1 +
kernel/fork.c | 3 +++
kernel/power/process.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++-----------------
4 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6.20-mm2/include/linux/sched.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.20-mm2.orig/include/linux/sched.h
+++ linux-2.6.20-mm2/include/linux/sched.h
@@ -1189,6 +1189,7 @@ static inline void put_task_struct(struc
#define PF_SPREAD_SLAB 0x02000000 /* Spread some slab caches over cpuset */
#define PF_MEMPOLICY 0x10000000 /* Non-default NUMA mempolicy */
#define PF_MUTEX_TESTER 0x20000000 /* Thread belongs to the rt mutex tester */
+#define PF_FREEZER_SKIP 0x40000000 /* Freezer should not count it as freezeable */
/*
* Only the _current_ task can read/write to tsk->flags, but other
Index: linux-2.6.20-mm2/include/linux/freezer.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.20-mm2.orig/include/linux/freezer.h
+++ linux-2.6.20-mm2/include/linux/freezer.h
@@ -40,11 +40,15 @@ static inline void do_not_freeze(struct
*/
static inline int thaw_process(struct task_struct *p)
{
+ task_lock(p);
if (frozen(p)) {
p->flags &= ~PF_FROZEN;
+ task_unlock(p);
wake_up_process(p);
return 1;
}
+ clear_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_FREEZE);
+ task_unlock(p);
return 0;
}
@@ -71,7 +75,31 @@ static inline int try_to_freeze(void)
return 0;
}
-extern void thaw_some_processes(int all);
+/*
+ * Tell the freezer not to count current task as freezeable
+ */
+static inline void freezer_do_not_count(void)
+{
+ current->flags |= PF_FREEZER_SKIP;
+}
+
+/*
+ * Try to freeze the current task and tell the freezer to count it as freezeable
+ * again
+ */
+static inline void freezer_count(void)
+{
+ current->flags &= ~PF_FREEZER_SKIP;
+ try_to_freeze();
+}
+
+/*
+ * Check if the task should be counted as freezeable by the freezer
+ */
+static inline int freezer_should_skip(struct task_struct *p)
+{
+ return !!(p->flags & PF_FREEZER_SKIP);
+}
#else
static inline int frozen(struct task_struct *p) { return 0; }
@@ -86,5 +114,7 @@ static inline void thaw_processes(void)
static inline int try_to_freeze(void) { return 0; }
-
+static inline void freezer_do_not_count(void) {}
+static inline void freezer_count(void) {}
+static inline int freezer_should_skip(struct task_struct *p) { return 0; }
#endif
Index: linux-2.6.20-mm2/kernel/fork.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.20-mm2.orig/kernel/fork.c
+++ linux-2.6.20-mm2/kernel/fork.c
@@ -50,6 +50,7 @@
#include <linux/taskstats_kern.h>
#include <linux/random.h>
#include <linux/ptrace.h>
+#include <linux/freezer.h>
#include <asm/pgtable.h>
#include <asm/pgalloc.h>
@@ -1393,7 +1394,9 @@ long do_fork(unsigned long clone_flags,
tracehook_report_clone_complete(clone_flags, nr, p);
if (clone_flags & CLONE_VFORK) {
+ freezer_do_not_count();
wait_for_completion(&vfork);
+ freezer_count();
tracehook_report_vfork_done(p, nr);
}
} else {
Index: linux-2.6.20-mm2/kernel/power/process.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.20-mm2.orig/kernel/power/process.c
+++ linux-2.6.20-mm2/kernel/power/process.c
@@ -39,10 +39,18 @@ void refrigerator(void)
/* Hmm, should we be allowed to suspend when there are realtime
processes around? */
long save;
+
+ task_lock(current);
+ if (freezing(current)) {
+ frozen_process(current);
+ task_unlock(current);
+ } else {
+ task_unlock(current);
+ return;
+ }
save = current->state;
pr_debug("%s entered refrigerator\n", current->comm);
- frozen_process(current);
spin_lock_irq(¤t->sighand->siglock);
recalc_sigpending(); /* We sent fake signal, clean it up */
spin_unlock_irq(¤t->sighand->siglock);
@@ -79,12 +87,16 @@ static void cancel_freezing(struct task_
{
unsigned long flags;
+ task_lock(p);
if (freezing(p)) {
pr_debug(" clean up: %s\n", p->comm);
do_not_freeze(p);
+ task_unlock(p);
spin_lock_irqsave(&p->sighand->siglock, flags);
recalc_sigpending_tsk(p);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&p->sighand->siglock, flags);
+ } else {
+ task_unlock(p);
}
}
@@ -119,22 +131,12 @@ static unsigned int try_to_freeze_tasks(
cancel_freezing(p);
continue;
}
- if (is_user_space(p)) {
- if (!freeze_user_space)
- continue;
-
- /* Freeze the task unless there is a vfork
- * completion pending
- */
- if (!p->vfork_done)
- freeze_process(p);
- } else {
- if (freeze_user_space)
- continue;
+ if (is_user_space(p) == !freeze_user_space)
+ continue;
- freeze_process(p);
- }
- todo++;
+ freeze_process(p);
+ if (!freezer_should_skip(p))
+ todo++;
} while_each_thread(g, p);
read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
yield(); /* Yield is okay here */
@@ -207,7 +209,7 @@ static void thaw_tasks(int thaw_user_spa
if (is_user_space(p) == !thaw_user_space)
continue;
- if (!thaw_process(p))
+ if (!thaw_process(p) && !freezer_should_skip(p))
printk(KERN_WARNING " Strange, %s not stopped\n",
p->comm );
} while_each_thread(g, p);
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
