Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 12 Nov 2010 08:38:38 -0800
From:      mdf@FreeBSD.org
To:        Hans Petter Selasky <hselasky@c2i.net>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: sleep bug in taskqueue(9)
Message-ID:  <AANLkTimoKgWAPv0aUOcCO9NFEWByKSuDekkxppOwGcd5@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <201011121523.18044.hselasky@c2i.net>
References:  <06D5F9F6F655AD4C92E28B662F7F853E039E389A@seaxch09.desktop.isilon.com> <201011120956.04501.hselasky@c2i.net> <AANLkTinVN=RsMQSvKCKmPg0M9vTZXk5mKmRSRR%2BVSzhh@mail.gmail.com> <201011121523.18044.hselasky@c2i.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 6:23 AM, Hans Petter Selasky <hselasky@c2i.net> wro=
te:
> On Friday 12 November 2010 15:18:46 mdf@freebsd.org wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 12:56 AM, Hans Petter Selasky <hselasky@c2i.net>
> wrote:
>> > On Thursday 29 April 2010 01:59:58 Matthew Fleming wrote:
>> >> It looks to me like taskqueue_drain(taskqueue_thread, foo) will not
>> >> correctly detect whether or not a task is currently running. =A0The c=
heck
>> >> is against a field in the taskqueue struct, but for the taskqueue_thr=
ead
>> >> queue with more than one thread, multiple threads can simultaneously =
be
>> >> running a task, thus stomping over the tq_running field.
>> >>
>> >> I have not seen any problem with the code as-is in actual use, so thi=
s
>> >> is purely an inspection bug.
>> >>
>> >> The following patch should fix the problem. =A0Because it changes the=
 size
>> >> of struct task I'm not sure if it would be suitable for MFC.
>> >
>> > 1) The u_char is going to leave a hole in that structure on ARM platfo=
rms
>> > for example.
>> >
>> > 2) The existing taskqueue implementation also has a missing check for =
the
>> > pending count wrapping to zero. I.E. it should stick at 0xFFFF and not
>> > wrap to 0.
>>
>> This commit mail is rather old, and this fix was incorrect, because
>> the task cannot be referenced after it has been run. =A0Some task
>> handlers will free the task as part of the handler.
>
> Ok, maybe the e-mail got stuck somewhere. Have you fixed the above mentio=
ned
> issues in a newer patch?

If you look at the file history for subr_taskqueue.c:

http://svn.freebsd.org/viewvc/base/head/sys/kern/subr_taskqueue.c

You will see quite a few commits by me.  The most recent relating to
detecting if a task is running is being MFC'd today:


Revision 213813 - (view) (annotate) - [select for diffs]
Modified Wed Oct 13 22:59:04 2010 UTC (4 weeks, 1 day ago) by mdf
File length: 10831 byte(s)
Diff to previous 213739
Use a safer mechanism for determining if a task is currently running,
that does not rely on the lifetime of pointers being the same. This also
restores the task KBI.

Suggested by:	jhb
MFC after:	1 month

Thanks,
matthew



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTimoKgWAPv0aUOcCO9NFEWByKSuDekkxppOwGcd5>