I am reading Linux Kernel Development recently, and I have a few questions related to disabling preemption.
In the "Interrupt Control" section of chapter 7, it says:
Moreover, disabling interrupts also disables kernel preemption.
I also read from the book that kernel preemption can occur in the follow cases:
When an interrupt handler exits, before returning to kernel-space.
When kernel code becomes preemptible again.
If a task in the kernel explicitly calls schedule()
If a task in ther kernel blocks (which results in a call to schedule())
But I can't relate disabling interrupts with these cases.
As far as I know, a spinlock would disable preemption with the preempt_disable() function.
On a single core machine a spinlock is simply a "disable interrupts" or "raise IRQL" which prevents thread scheduling completely.
Does preempt_disable() disable preemption by disabling interrupts?
解决方案
I am not a scheduler guru, but I would like to explain how I see it.
Here are several things.
preempt_disable() doesn't disable IRQ. It just increases a thread_info->preempt_count variable.
Disabling interrupts also disables preemption because scheduler isn't working after that - but only on a single-CPU machine. On the SMP it isn't enough because when you close the interrupts on one CPU the other / others still does / do something asynchronously.
The Big Lock (means - closing all interrupts on all CPUs) is slowing the system down dramatically - so it is why it not anymore in use. This is also the reason why preempt_disable() doesn't close the IRQ.
You can see what is preempt_disable(). Try this:
1. Get a spinlock.
2. Call schedule()
In the dmesg you will see something like "BUG: scheduling while atomic". This happens when scheduler detects that your process in atomic (not preemptive) context but it schedules itself.
Good luck.