[tip: sched/core] sched/core: Fix RQCF_ACT_SKIP leak

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



The following commit has been merged into the sched/core branch of tip:

Commit-ID:     5ebde09d91707a4a9bec1e3d213e3c12ffde348f
Gitweb:        https://git.kernel.org/tip/5ebde09d91707a4a9bec1e3d213e3c12ffde348f
Author:        Hao Jia <jiahao.os@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
AuthorDate:    Thu, 12 Oct 2023 17:00:03 +08:00
Committer:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
CommitterDate: Tue, 24 Oct 2023 10:38:42 +02:00

sched/core: Fix RQCF_ACT_SKIP leak

Igor Raits and Bagas Sanjaya report a RQCF_ACT_SKIP leak warning.

This warning may be triggered in the following situations:

    CPU0                                      CPU1

__schedule()
  *rq->clock_update_flags <<= 1;*   unregister_fair_sched_group()
  pick_next_task_fair+0x4a/0x410      destroy_cfs_bandwidth()
    newidle_balance+0x115/0x3e0       for_each_possible_cpu(i) *i=0*
      rq_unpin_lock(this_rq, rf)      __cfsb_csd_unthrottle()
      raw_spin_rq_unlock(this_rq)
                                      rq_lock(*CPU0_rq*, &rf)
                                      rq_clock_start_loop_update()
                                      rq->clock_update_flags & RQCF_ACT_SKIP <--
      raw_spin_rq_lock(this_rq)

The purpose of RQCF_ACT_SKIP is to skip the update rq clock,
but the update is very early in __schedule(), but we clear
RQCF_*_SKIP very late, causing it to span that gap above
and triggering this warning.

In __schedule() we can clear the RQCF_*_SKIP flag immediately
after update_rq_clock() to avoid this RQCF_ACT_SKIP leak warning.
And set rq->clock_update_flags to RQCF_UPDATED to avoid
rq->clock_update_flags < RQCF_ACT_SKIP warning that may be triggered later.

Fixes: ebb83d84e49b ("sched/core: Avoid multiple calling update_rq_clock() in __cfsb_csd_unthrottle()")
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230913082424.73252-1-jiahao.os@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Reported-by: Igor Raits <igor.raits@xxxxxxxxx>
Reported-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx>
Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Hao Jia <jiahao.os@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/a5dd536d-041a-2ce9-f4b7-64d8d85c86dc@xxxxxxxxx
---
 kernel/sched/core.c | 5 +----
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index 264c2eb..dc724f5 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -5361,8 +5361,6 @@ context_switch(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev,
 	/* switch_mm_cid() requires the memory barriers above. */
 	switch_mm_cid(rq, prev, next);
 
-	rq->clock_update_flags &= ~(RQCF_ACT_SKIP|RQCF_REQ_SKIP);
-
 	prepare_lock_switch(rq, next, rf);
 
 	/* Here we just switch the register state and the stack. */
@@ -6600,6 +6598,7 @@ static void __sched notrace __schedule(unsigned int sched_mode)
 	/* Promote REQ to ACT */
 	rq->clock_update_flags <<= 1;
 	update_rq_clock(rq);
+	rq->clock_update_flags = RQCF_UPDATED;
 
 	switch_count = &prev->nivcsw;
 
@@ -6679,8 +6678,6 @@ static void __sched notrace __schedule(unsigned int sched_mode)
 		/* Also unlocks the rq: */
 		rq = context_switch(rq, prev, next, &rf);
 	} else {
-		rq->clock_update_flags &= ~(RQCF_ACT_SKIP|RQCF_REQ_SKIP);
-
 		rq_unpin_lock(rq, &rf);
 		__balance_callbacks(rq);
 		raw_spin_rq_unlock_irq(rq);



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux