Re: [PATCH v3] sched/fair: Care divide error in update_task_scan_period()

[Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com>]

Could you review my patch?

Thanks,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu

(2014/10/22 16:04), Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> While offling node by hot removing memory, the following divide error
> occurs:
> 
>    divide error: 0000 [#1] SMP
>    [...]
>    Call Trace:
>     [...] handle_mm_fault
>     [...] ? try_to_wake_up
>     [...] ? wake_up_state
>     [...] __do_page_fault
>     [...] ? do_futex
>     [...] ? put_prev_entity
>     [...] ? __switch_to
>     [...] do_page_fault
>     [...] page_fault
>    [...]
>    RIP  [<ffffffff810a7081>] task_numa_fault
>     RSP <ffff88084eb2bcb0>
> 
> The issue occurs as follows:
>    1. When page fault occurs and page is allocated from node 1,
>       task_struct->numa_faults_buffer_memory[] of node 1 is
>       incremented and p->numa_faults_locality[] is also incremented
>       as follows:
> 
>       o numa_faults_buffer_memory[]       o numa_faults_locality[]
>                NR_NUMA_HINT_FAULT_TYPES
>               |      0     |     1     |
>       ----------------------------------  ----------------------
>        node 0 |      0     |     0     |   remote |      0     |
>        node 1 |      0     |     1     |   locale |      1     |
>       ----------------------------------  ----------------------
> 
>    2. node 1 is offlined by hot removing memory.
> 
>    3. When page fault occurs, fault_types[] is calculated by using
>       p->numa_faults_buffer_memory[] of all online nodes in
>       task_numa_placement(). But node 1 was offline by step 2. So
>       the fault_types[] is calculated by using only
>       p->numa_faults_buffer_memory[] of node 0. So both of fault_types[]
>       are set to 0.
> 
>    4. The values(0) of fault_types[] pass to update_task_scan_period().
> 
>    5. numa_faults_locality[1] is set to 1. So the following division is
>       calculated.
> 
>          static void update_task_scan_period(struct task_struct *p,
>                                  unsigned long shared, unsigned long private){
>          ...
>                  ratio = DIV_ROUND_UP(private * NUMA_PERIOD_SLOTS, (private + shared));
>          }
> 
>    6. But both of private and shared are set to 0. So divide error
>       occurs here.
> 
> The divide error is rare case because the trigger is node offline.
> This patch always increments denominator for avoiding divide error.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com>
> ---
> v2:
>   - Simply increment a denominator
> 
>   kernel/sched/fair.c | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 0b069bf..f3b492d 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -1520,7 +1520,7 @@ static void update_task_scan_period(struct task_struct *p,
>   		 * scanning faster if shared accesses dominate as it may
>   		 * simply bounce migrations uselessly
>   		 */
> -		ratio = DIV_ROUND_UP(private * NUMA_PERIOD_SLOTS, (private + shared));
> +		ratio = DIV_ROUND_UP(private * NUMA_PERIOD_SLOTS, (private + shared + 1));
>   		diff = (diff * ratio) / NUMA_PERIOD_SLOTS;
>   	}
>