From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
To: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
John Keeping <john@metanate.com>
Cc: linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RT] BUG in sched/cpupri.c
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 19:48:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87r1a4775a.mognet@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <31a47e99-6de3-76ec-62ad-9c98d092ead5@arm.com>
On 22/12/21 18:46, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> On 21.12.21 17:45, John Keeping wrote:
>> On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 16:11:34 +0000
>> Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 20/12/21 18:35, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
>>> index fd7c4f972aaf..7d61ceec1a3b 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
>>> @@ -2467,10 +2467,13 @@ static void switched_from_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
>>> * this is the right place to try to pull some other one
>>> * from an overloaded CPU, if any.
>>> */
>>> - if (!task_on_rq_queued(p) || rq->dl.dl_nr_running)
>>> + if (!task_on_rq_queued(p))
>>> return;
>>>
>>> - deadline_queue_pull_task(rq);
>>> + if (!rq->dl.dl_nr_running)
>>> + deadline_queue_pull_task(rq);
>>> + else if (task_current(rq, p) && (p->sched_class < &dl_sched_class))
>>> + resched_curr(rq);
>>> }
>>>
>>> /*
>>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/rt.c b/kernel/sched/rt.c
>>> index ef8228d19382..1ea2567612fb 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/sched/rt.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/sched/rt.c
>>> @@ -2322,10 +2322,13 @@ static void switched_from_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
>>> * we may need to handle the pulling of RT tasks
>>> * now.
>>> */
>>> - if (!task_on_rq_queued(p) || rq->rt.rt_nr_running)
>>> + if (!task_on_rq_queued(p))
>>> return;
>>>
>>> - rt_queue_pull_task(rq);
>>> + if (!rq->rt.rt_nr_running)
>>> + rt_queue_pull_task(rq);
>>> + else if (task_current(rq, p) && (p->sched_class < &rt_sched_class))
>>> + resched_curr(rq);
>
> switched_from_rt() -> rt_queue_pull_task(, pull_rt_task)
> pull_rt_task()->tell_cpu_to_push()->irq_work_queue_on(&rq->rd->rto_push_work,)
> rto_push_irq_work_func() -> push_rt_task(rq, true)
>
> seems to be the only way with pull=true.
>
> In my tests, rq->rt.rt_nr_running seems to be 0 when it happens.
>
> [ 22.288537] CPU3 switched_to_rt: p=[ksoftirqd/3 35]
> [ 22.288554] rt_mutex_setprio: CPU3 p=[ksoftirqd/3 35] pi_task=[rcu_preempt 11] queued=1 running=0 prio=98 oldprio=120
> [ 22.288636] CPU3 switched_from_rt: p=[ksoftirqd/3 35] rq->rt.rt_nr_running=0
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> [ 22.288649] rt_mutex_setprio: CPU3 p=[ksoftirqd/3 35] queued=1 running=1 prio=120 oldprio=98
> [ 22.288681] CPU3 push_rt_task: next_task=[rcu_preempt 11] migr_dis=1 rq->curr=[ksoftirqd/3 35] pull=1
> ^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^
mark_wakeup_next_waiter() first deboosts the previous owner and then
wakeups the next top waiter. Seems like you somehow have the wakeup happen
before the push_rt_task IRQ work is run. Also, tell_cpu_to_push() should
only pick a CPU that is in rq->rd->rto_mask, which requires having at least
2 RT tasks there...
Now, that wakeup from the rtmutex unlock would give us a resched_curr() via
check_preempt_curr() if required, which is good, though I think we are
still missing some for sched_setscheduler() (there are no wakeups
there). So if we just have to live with an IRQ work popping in before we
get to preempt_schedule_irq() (or somesuch), then perhaps the below would
be sufficient.
> What about slightly changing the layout in switched_from_rt() (only lightly tested):
>
>
> @@ -2322,7 +2338,15 @@ static void switched_from_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> * we may need to handle the pulling of RT tasks
> * now.
> */
> - if (!task_on_rq_queued(p) || rq->rt.rt_nr_running)
> + if (!task_on_rq_queued(p))
> + return;
> +
> + if (task_current(rq, p) && (p->sched_class < &rt_sched_class)) {
> + resched_curr(rq);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + if (rq->rt.rt_nr_running)
> return;
>
> rt_queue_pull_task(rq);
If !rq->rt.rt_nr_running then there's no point in issuing a reschedule (at
least from RT's perspective; p->sched_class->switched_to() takes care of
the rest)
---
diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
index fd7c4f972aaf..7d61ceec1a3b 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
@@ -2467,10 +2467,13 @@ static void switched_from_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
* this is the right place to try to pull some other one
* from an overloaded CPU, if any.
*/
- if (!task_on_rq_queued(p) || rq->dl.dl_nr_running)
+ if (!task_on_rq_queued(p))
return;
- deadline_queue_pull_task(rq);
+ if (!rq->dl.dl_nr_running)
+ deadline_queue_pull_task(rq);
+ else if (task_current(rq, p) && (p->sched_class < &dl_sched_class))
+ resched_curr(rq);
}
/*
diff --git a/kernel/sched/rt.c b/kernel/sched/rt.c
index ef8228d19382..8f3e3a1367b6 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/rt.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/rt.c
@@ -1890,6 +1890,16 @@ static int push_rt_task(struct rq *rq, bool pull)
if (!next_task)
return 0;
+ /*
+ * It's possible that the next_task slipped in of higher priority than
+ * current, or current has *just* changed priority. If that's the case
+ * just reschedule current.
+ */
+ if (unlikely(next_task->prio < rq->curr->prio)) {
+ resched_curr(rq);
+ return 0;
+ }
+
retry:
if (is_migration_disabled(next_task)) {
struct task_struct *push_task = NULL;
@@ -1922,16 +1932,6 @@ static int push_rt_task(struct rq *rq, bool pull)
if (WARN_ON(next_task == rq->curr))
return 0;
- /*
- * It's possible that the next_task slipped in of
- * higher priority than current. If that's the case
- * just reschedule current.
- */
- if (unlikely(next_task->prio < rq->curr->prio)) {
- resched_curr(rq);
- return 0;
- }
-
/* We might release rq lock */
get_task_struct(next_task);
@@ -2322,10 +2322,13 @@ static void switched_from_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
* we may need to handle the pulling of RT tasks
* now.
*/
- if (!task_on_rq_queued(p) || rq->rt.rt_nr_running)
+ if (!task_on_rq_queued(p))
return;
- rt_queue_pull_task(rq);
+ if (!rq->rt.rt_nr_running)
+ rt_queue_pull_task(rq);
+ else if (task_current(rq, p) && (p->sched_class < &rt_sched_class))
+ resched_curr(rq);
}
void __init init_sched_rt_class(void)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-12-22 19:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-12-18 14:25 [RT] BUG in sched/cpupri.c John Keeping
2021-12-20 17:35 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2021-12-21 16:11 ` Valentin Schneider
2021-12-21 16:45 ` John Keeping
2021-12-21 17:22 ` Valentin Schneider
2021-12-21 17:42 ` John Keeping
2021-12-22 17:46 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2021-12-22 18:45 ` John Keeping
2021-12-22 19:48 ` Valentin Schneider [this message]
2021-12-23 11:58 ` John Keeping
2021-12-23 14:05 ` Valentin Schneider
2022-01-07 10:46 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2022-01-07 11:49 ` John Keeping
2022-01-07 14:25 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2022-01-07 18:35 ` John Keeping
2022-01-14 18:25 ` Valentin Schneider
2022-06-27 2:02 ` andreadaoud6
2022-06-27 9:51 ` John Keeping
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=87r1a4775a.mognet@arm.com \
--to=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=john@metanate.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
/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.