From: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: tglx@linutronix.de, bigeasy@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: FAILED: patch "[PATCH] sched: Prevent balance_push() on remote runqueues" failed to apply to 5.13-stable tree
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 16:13:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1631715213238253@kroah.com> (raw)
The patch below does not apply to the 5.13-stable tree.
If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
id to <stable@vger.kernel.org>.
thanks,
greg k-h
------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------
From 868ad33bfa3bf39960982682ad3a0f8ebda1656e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2021 15:55:52 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] sched: Prevent balance_push() on remote runqueues
sched_setscheduler() and rt_mutex_setprio() invoke the run-queue balance
callback after changing priorities or the scheduling class of a task. The
run-queue for which the callback is invoked can be local or remote.
That's not a problem for the regular rq::push_work which is serialized with
a busy flag in the run-queue struct, but for the balance_push() work which
is only valid to be invoked on the outgoing CPU that's wrong. It not only
triggers the debug warning, but also leaves the per CPU variable push_work
unprotected, which can result in double enqueues on the stop machine list.
Remove the warning and validate that the function is invoked on the
outgoing CPU.
Fixes: ae7927023243 ("sched: Optimize finish_lock_switch()")
Reported-by: Sebastian Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/87zgt1hdw7.ffs@tglx
diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index f3b27c6c5153..b21a1857b75a 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -8523,7 +8523,6 @@ static void balance_push(struct rq *rq)
struct task_struct *push_task = rq->curr;
lockdep_assert_rq_held(rq);
- SCHED_WARN_ON(rq->cpu != smp_processor_id());
/*
* Ensure the thing is persistent until balance_push_set(.on = false);
@@ -8531,9 +8530,10 @@ static void balance_push(struct rq *rq)
rq->balance_callback = &balance_push_callback;
/*
- * Only active while going offline.
+ * Only active while going offline and when invoked on the outgoing
+ * CPU.
*/
- if (!cpu_dying(rq->cpu))
+ if (!cpu_dying(rq->cpu) || rq != this_rq())
return;
/*
reply other threads:[~2021-09-15 14:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1631715213238253@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.