try_to_freeze() called with IRQs disabled on ARM
Russell King - ARM Linux
linux at arm.linux.org.uk
Thu Aug 25 08:14:16 EDT 2011
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:17:03AM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:13 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> <linux at arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > Thereby entirely preventing threads from being frozen? You're asking
> > me to effectively disable suspend/resume on an architecture where it's
> > heavily used. That's not a good idea, and would be an out-right
> > regression.
>
> Eh? So, it's supposed to enter refrigerator with IRQ disabled? Then,
> moving might_sleep() inside refrigerator() doesn't help either, does
> it? Then we should be doing is,
>
> if (freezing() && IRQ disabled) {
> bust on IRQ;
> try_to_freeze();
> replug IRQ;
> }
>
> But, that can't be right. The current code isn't triggering warning
> from scheduler code, right? If the above is the case, it should be
> triggering that. What am I missing?
The scheduler code does not check for CPU IRQs being masked. It just
checks the preempt count, nothing more.
might_sleep() on the other hand checks the preempt count _and_ CPU IRQ
mask state.
Note that your 'IRQ disabled' will always be true for ARM at this point
at the moment - and conditionalizing this won't help (see below).
Given that get_signal_to_deliver() already forcefully enables IRQs,
I think our syscall restarting is already horribly racy here in the
way I've previously described.
It also looks to me like get_signal_to_deliver() already handles the
freezing stuff, so does ARM even need this call here? Maybe when:
commit fc558a7496bfab3d29a68953b07a95883fdcfbb1
Author: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw at sisk.pl>
Date: Thu Mar 23 03:00:05 2006 -0800
[PATCH] swsusp: finally solve mysqld problem
was introduced, every other architecture should have been updated for
that change... So this call in the ARM signal handling code to
try_to_freeze() should just be deleted as it should've been done five
years ago.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list