On Sun, 11 May 2008, Matthew Wilcox wrote:

quoted text
> On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 05:10:28PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> @@ -258,7 +256,5 @@ static noinline void __sched __up(struct semaphore *sem)
>>  {
>>  	struct semaphore_waiter *waiter = list_first_entry(&sem->wait_list,
>>  						struct semaphore_waiter, list);
>> -	list_del(&waiter->list);
>> -	waiter->up = 1;
>>  	wake_up_process(waiter->task);
>>  }
>
> This might be the problem that causes the missing wakeups.  If you have a
> semaphore with n=2, and four processes calling down(), tasks A and B
> acquire the semaphore and tasks C and D go to sleep.  Task A calls up()
> and wakes up C.  Then task B calls up() and doesn't wake up anyone
> because C hasn't run yet.  I think we need another wakeup when task C
> finishes in __down_common, like this (on top of your patch):
>
> diff --git a/kernel/semaphore.c b/kernel/semaphore.c
> index 5e41217..e520ad4 100644
> --- a/kernel/semaphore.c
> +++ b/kernel/semaphore.c
> @@ -229,6 +229,11 @@ static inline int __sched __down_common(struct semaphore *sem, long state,
> 	}
>
> 	list_del(&waiter.list);
> +
> +	/* It's possible we need to wake up the next task on the list too */
> +	if (unlikely(sem->count > 1) && !list_empty(&sem->wait_list))
> +		__up(sem);
> +
> 	return ret;
> }
>
> Sven, can you try this with your workload?  I suspect this might be it
> because XFS does use semaphores with n>1.

This one fixes the regression too, after applying it on top of bf726e.

Sven
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/