Re: [PATCH 12/24] sched/fair: Prepare exit/cleanup paths for delayed_dequeue

[Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>]

On 2024-07-27 at 12:27:44 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> When dequeue_task() is delayed it becomes possible to exit a task (or
> cgroup) that is still enqueued. Ensure things are dequeued before
> freeing.
> 
> NOTE: switched_from_fair() causes spurious wakeups due to clearing
> sched_delayed after enqueueing a task in another class that should've
> been dequeued. This *should* be harmless.
>

It might bring some expected behavior in some corner cases reported here:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202408161619.9ed8b83e-lkp@intel.com/
As the block task might return from schedule() with TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE.

We cooked a patch to workaround it(as below).

thanks,
Chenyu
 
From 9251b25073d43aeac04a6ee69b590fbfa1b8e1a5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2024 22:16:38 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] sched/eevdf: Dequeue the delayed task when changing its
 schedule policy

[Problem Statement]
The following warning was reported:

 do not call blocking ops when !TASK_RUNNING; state=1 set at kthread_worker_fn (kernel/kthread.c:?)
 WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 674 at kernel/sched/core.c:8469 __might_sleep

 handle_bug
 exc_invalid_op
 asm_exc_invalid_op
 __might_sleep
 __might_sleep
 kthread_worker_fn
 kthread_worker_fn
 kthread
 __cfi_kthread_worker_fn
 ret_from_fork
 __cfi_kthread
 ret_from_fork_asm

[Symptom]
kthread_worker_fn()
  ...
repeat:
  set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
  ...
  if (work) { // false
    __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
    ...
  } else if (!freezing(current)) {
    schedule();
    // after schedule, the state is still *TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE*
  }

  try_to_freeze()
    might_sleep() <--- trigger the warning

[Analysis]
The question is after schedule(), the state remains TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE
rather than TASK_RUNNING. The short answer is, someone has incorrectly
picked the TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE task from the tree. The scenario is described
below, and all steps happen on 1 CPU:

time
 |
 |
 |
 v

  kthread_worker_fn()   <--- t1
    set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE)
      schedule()
        block_task(t1)
          dequeue_entity(t1)
            t1->sched_delayed = 1

        t2 = pick_next_task()
          put_prev_task(t1)
            enqueue_entity(t1)  <--- TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE in the tree

  t1 switches to t2

  erofs_init_percpu_worker()    <--- t2
    sched_set_fifo_low(t1)
      sched_setscheduler_nocheck(t1)

        __sched_setscheduler(t1)
          t1->sched_class = &rt_sched_class

          check_class_changed(t1)
            switched_from_fair(t1)
              t1->sched_delayed = 0 <--- gotcha

              ** from now on, t1 in the tree is TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE **
              ** and sched_delayed = 0 **

          preempt_enable()
            preempt_schedule()
              t1 = pick_next_task() <--- because sched_delayed = 0, eligible

  t2 switches back to t1, now t1 is TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE.

The cause is, switched_from_fair() incorrectly clear the sched_delayed
flag and confuse the pick_next_task() that it thinks a delayed task is a
eligible task(without dequeue it).

[Proposal]
In the __sched_setscheduler() when trying to change the policy of that
delayed task, do not re-enqueue the delayed task thus to avoid being
picked again. The side effect that, the delayed task can not wait for
its 0-vlag time to be dequeued, but its effect should be neglect.

Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202408161619.9ed8b83e-lkp@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
---
 kernel/sched/syscalls.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/syscalls.c b/kernel/sched/syscalls.c
index 4fae3cf25a3a..10859536e509 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/syscalls.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/syscalls.c
@@ -818,7 +818,8 @@ int __sched_setscheduler(struct task_struct *p,
 		if (oldprio < p->prio)
 			queue_flags |= ENQUEUE_HEAD;
 
-		enqueue_task(rq, p, queue_flags);
+		if (!p->se.sched_delayed)
+			enqueue_task(rq, p, queue_flags);
 	}
 	if (running)
 		set_next_task(rq, p);
-- 
2.25.1