[PATCH] sched/numa: Acquire RCU lock for checking idle cores during NUMA balancing

[Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>]

Qian Cai reported the following

  The linux-next commit ff7db0bf24db ("sched/numa: Prefer using an idle CPU as a
  migration target instead of comparing tasks") introduced a boot warning,

  [   86.520534][    T1] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
  [   86.520540][    T1] 5.6.0-rc3-next-20200227 #7 Not tainted
  [   86.520545][    T1] -----------------------------
  [   86.520551][    T1] kernel/sched/fair.c:5914 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage!
  [   86.520555][    T1]
  [   86.520555][    T1] other info that might help us debug this:
  [   86.520555][    T1]
  [   86.520561][    T1]
  [   86.520561][    T1] rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 1
  [   86.520567][    T1] 1 lock held by systemd/1:
  [   86.520571][    T1]  #0: ffff8887f4b14848 (&mm->mmap_sem#2){++++}, at: do_page_fault+0x1d2/0x998
  [   86.520594][    T1]
  [   86.520594][    T1] stack backtrace:
  [   86.520602][    T1] CPU: 1 PID: 1 Comm: systemd Not tainted 5.6.0-rc3-next-20200227 #7

task_numa_migrate() checks for idle cores when updating NUMA-related statistics.
This relies on reading a RCU-protected structure in test_idle_cores() via this
call chain

task_numa_migrate
  -> update_numa_stats
    -> numa_idle_core
      -> test_idle_cores

While the locking could be fine-grained, it is more appropriate to acquire
the RCU lock for the entire scan of the domain. This patch removes the
warning triggered at boot time.

Fixes: ff7db0bf24db ("sched/numa: Prefer using an idle CPU as a migration target instead of comparing tasks")
Reported-by: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
---
 kernel/sched/fair.c | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 10f9e6729fcf..1592b6d26239 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -1595,6 +1595,7 @@ static void update_numa_stats(struct task_numa_env *env,
 	memset(ns, 0, sizeof(*ns));
 	ns->idle_cpu = -1;
 
+	rcu_read_lock();
 	for_each_cpu(cpu, cpumask_of_node(nid)) {
 		struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
 
@@ -1614,6 +1615,7 @@ static void update_numa_stats(struct task_numa_env *env,
 			idle_core = numa_idle_core(idle_core, cpu);
 		}
 	}
+	rcu_read_unlock();
 
 	ns->weight = cpumask_weight(cpumask_of_node(nid));