Ok you're right, that prevents it.
Sorry, I missed this check somehow.
Cheers
Marcus
On 07/08/2013 07:31 AM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> On 07/06/2013 09:37 PM, Marcus Gelderie wrote:
>> This patch fixes a race condition whereby the process can be caused to
>> sleep indefinitely. The problem occurs when the process is preempted
>> after having set its state to TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE but before starting the
>> alarm.
>>
>
> I don't think there is any such problem. The __schedule() function does
> this check before dequeuing a task:
>
> if (prev->state && !(preempt_count() & PREEMPT_ACTIVE))
>
> The latter part helps prevent the kind of indefinite sleeping you described
> above. Also, take a look at preempt_schedule(), preempt_schedule_irq()
> and friends to see how in-kernel preemption is dealt with, by using
> PREEMPT_ACTIVE. That would clarify why there is no bug here.
>
> Regards,
> Srivatsa S. Bhat
>
>> ---
>> kernel/time/alarmtimer.c | 6 +++++-
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/time/alarmtimer.c b/kernel/time/alarmtimer.c
>> index f11d83b..81c8b31 100644
>> --- a/kernel/time/alarmtimer.c
>> +++ b/kernel/time/alarmtimer.c
>> @@ -585,15 +585,19 @@ static int alarmtimer_do_nsleep(struct alarm *alarm,
>> ktime_t absexp)
>> {
>> alarm->data = (void *)current;
>> do {
>> + preempt_disable();
>> set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
>> alarm_start(alarm, absexp);
>> + preempt_enable_no_resched();
>> if (likely(alarm->data))
>> schedule();
>>
>> + preempt_disable();
>> alarm_cancel(alarm);
>> + __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
>> + preempt_enable_no_resched();
>> } while (alarm->data && !signal_pending(current));
>>
>> - __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
>>
>> return (alarm->data == NULL);
>> }
>>
>
--
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/
