From 1a43a14a5bd9c32dbd7af35e35a5afa703944bcb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Oleg Nesterov Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 21:36:44 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] sched: Fix schedule_tail() to disable preemption finish_task_switch() enables preemption, so post_schedule(rq) can be called on the wrong (and even dead) CPU. Afaics, nothing really bad can happen, but in this case we can wrongly clear rq->post_schedule on that CPU. And this simply looks wrong in any case. Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Cc: Steven Rostedt Cc: Kirill Tkhai Cc: Linus Torvalds Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20141008193644.GA32055@redhat.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- kernel/sched/core.c | 11 +++++------ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c index cde848149dd6..b4935600cd85 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/core.c +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c @@ -2309,15 +2309,14 @@ static inline void post_schedule(struct rq *rq) asmlinkage __visible void schedule_tail(struct task_struct *prev) __releases(rq->lock) { - struct rq *rq = this_rq(); + struct rq *rq; + /* finish_task_switch() drops rq->lock and enables preemtion */ + preempt_disable(); + rq = this_rq(); finish_task_switch(rq, prev); - - /* - * FIXME: do we need to worry about rq being invalidated by the - * task_switch? - */ post_schedule(rq); + preempt_enable(); if (current->set_child_tid) put_user(task_pid_vnr(current), current->set_child_tid); -- 2.20.1