This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
sched/deadline: Check bandwidth overflow earlier for hotplug
to the 6.12-stable tree which can be found at:
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
The filename of the patch is:
sched-deadline-check-bandwidth-overflow-earlier-for-.patch
and it can be found in the queue-6.12 subdirectory.
If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> know about it.
commit aee0c37052bd5c9a3ecc8a188015b0c2ff999de8
Author: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri Nov 15 11:48:29 2024 +0000
sched/deadline: Check bandwidth overflow earlier for hotplug
[ Upstream commit 53916d5fd3c0b658de3463439dd2b7ce765072cb ]
Currently we check for bandwidth overflow potentially due to hotplug
operations at the end of sched_cpu_deactivate(), after the cpu going
offline has already been removed from scheduling, active_mask, etc.
This can create issues for DEADLINE tasks, as there is a substantial
race window between the start of sched_cpu_deactivate() and the moment
we possibly decide to roll-back the operation if dl_bw_deactivate()
returns failure in cpuset_cpu_inactive(). An example is a throttled
task that sees its replenishment timer firing while the cpu it was
previously running on is considered offline, but before
dl_bw_deactivate() had a chance to say no and roll-back happened.
Fix this by directly calling dl_bw_deactivate() first thing in
sched_cpu_deactivate() and do the required calculation in the former
function considering the cpu passed as an argument as offline already.
By doing so we also simplify sched_cpu_deactivate(), as there is no need
anymore for any kind of roll-back if we fail early.
Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Phil Auld <pauld@xxxxxxxxxx>
Tested-by: Waiman Long <longman@xxxxxxxxxx>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/Zzc1DfPhbvqDDIJR@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx>
diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index e2756138609c1..4b455e491ea48 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -8091,19 +8091,14 @@ static void cpuset_cpu_active(void)
cpuset_update_active_cpus();
}
-static int cpuset_cpu_inactive(unsigned int cpu)
+static void cpuset_cpu_inactive(unsigned int cpu)
{
if (!cpuhp_tasks_frozen) {
- int ret = dl_bw_deactivate(cpu);
-
- if (ret)
- return ret;
cpuset_update_active_cpus();
} else {
num_cpus_frozen++;
partition_sched_domains(1, NULL, NULL);
}
- return 0;
}
static inline void sched_smt_present_inc(int cpu)
@@ -8165,6 +8160,11 @@ int sched_cpu_deactivate(unsigned int cpu)
struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
int ret;
+ ret = dl_bw_deactivate(cpu);
+
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
/*
* Remove CPU from nohz.idle_cpus_mask to prevent participating in
* load balancing when not active
@@ -8210,15 +8210,7 @@ int sched_cpu_deactivate(unsigned int cpu)
return 0;
sched_update_numa(cpu, false);
- ret = cpuset_cpu_inactive(cpu);
- if (ret) {
- sched_smt_present_inc(cpu);
- sched_set_rq_online(rq, cpu);
- balance_push_set(cpu, false);
- set_cpu_active(cpu, true);
- sched_update_numa(cpu, true);
- return ret;
- }
+ cpuset_cpu_inactive(cpu);
sched_domains_numa_masks_clear(cpu);
return 0;
}
diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
index 36fd501ad9958..ec2b66a7aae0e 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
@@ -3499,6 +3499,13 @@ static int dl_bw_manage(enum dl_bw_request req, int cpu, u64 dl_bw)
}
break;
case dl_bw_req_deactivate:
+ /*
+ * cpu is not off yet, but we need to do the math by
+ * considering it off already (i.e., what would happen if we
+ * turn cpu off?).
+ */
+ cap -= arch_scale_cpu_capacity(cpu);
+
/*
* cpu is going offline and NORMAL tasks will be moved away
* from it. We can thus discount dl_server bandwidth
@@ -3516,9 +3523,10 @@ static int dl_bw_manage(enum dl_bw_request req, int cpu, u64 dl_bw)
if (dl_b->total_bw - fair_server_bw > 0) {
/*
* Leaving at least one CPU for DEADLINE tasks seems a
- * wise thing to do.
+ * wise thing to do. As said above, cpu is not offline
+ * yet, so account for that.
*/
- if (dl_bw_cpus(cpu))
+ if (dl_bw_cpus(cpu) - 1)
overflow = __dl_overflow(dl_b, cap, fair_server_bw, 0);
else
overflow = 1;
