On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 03:04:57PM -0400, Phil Auld wrote: > On systems with weaker memory ordering (e.g. power) commit dbfb089d360b > ("sched: Fix loadavg accounting race") causes increasing values of load > average (via rq->calc_load_active and calc_load_tasks) due to the wakeup > CPU not always seeing the write to task->sched_contributes_to_load in > __schedule(). Missing that we fail to decrement nr_uninterruptible when > waking up a task which incremented nr_uninterruptible when it slept. > > The rq->lock serialization is insufficient across different rq->locks. > > Add smp_wmb() to schedule and smp_rmb() before the read in > ttwu_do_activate(). > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c > index 4ca80df205ce..ced7074716eb 100644 > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c > @@ -2992,6 +2992,8 @@ ttwu_do_activate(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int wake_flags, > > lockdep_assert_held(&rq->lock); > > + /* Pairs with smp_wmb in __schedule() */ > + smp_rmb(); > if (p->sched_contributes_to_load) > rq->nr_uninterruptible--; > Is this really needed ?! (this question is a big fat clue the comment is insufficient). AFAICT try_to_wake_up() has a LOAD-ACQUIRE on p->on_rq and hence the p->sched_contributed_to_load must already happen after. > @@ -5084,6 +5086,11 @@ static void __sched notrace __schedule(bool preempt) > !(prev_state & TASK_NOLOAD) && > !(prev->flags & PF_FROZEN); > > + /* > + * Make sure the previous write is ordered before p->on_rq etc so > + * that it is visible to other cpus in the wakeup path (ttwu_do_activate()). > + */ > + smp_wmb(); > if (prev->sched_contributes_to_load) > rq->nr_uninterruptible++; That comment is terrible, look at all the other barrier comments around there for clues; in effect you're worrying about: p->sched_contributes_to_load = X R1 = p->on_rq WMB RMB p->on_rq = Y R2 = p->sched_contributes_to_load Right? Bah bah bah.. I so detest having to add barriers here for silly accounting. Let me think about this a little.