From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/5] cgroup/cpuset: make callback_lock raw
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 13:07:11 +0100
Message-ID: <20190204120711.GA17582@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20190117084739.17078-1-juri.lelli@redhat.com>
 <20190117084739.17078-4-juri.lelli@redhat.com>
 <20190204120236.GC17550@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version
        :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:
        Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:
        Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:
        List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive;
         bh=T11yeSKaaWrDjgEnyvEjdTZnpnv21kH/i3V0d3zl2Gw=; b=MYd1yjJr3HDuOZNds+OK+cjrW
        0WjLLJtEqx49kfb3nvOmwnBKrXRBjUs6Ql8wPY+eV08Rtl6zQ3NiAxnVwt8fnE0NEGD/QGTtQkXLH
        9qR9r4KafZNZmWF82zBz2CLqW5eGNYQLCK5xy89lCmgHt6+/AhG1shhPJ5klWHONXChMUbZ5wunLC
        exzr0MC1lBMM9z28KJnjbF7z9pNThM7ahSfAWwCHC+VM5U3CnyYk6STbBs9a9F5g7tz4jNvoQSShZ
        dSpUqFgSV8XaCCiyc07dARABK4pGAIwpF60EibvHdUEyOTwM7KHP+FxJlKaZycaxkwFTSZCOTzQ72
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190204120236.GC17550@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <cgroups.vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, tj@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, luca.abeni@santannapisa.it, claudio@evidence.eu.com, tommaso.cucinotta@santannapisa.it, bristot@redhat.com, mathieu.poirier@linaro.org, lizefan@huawei.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 01:02:36PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 09:47:37AM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote:
> > @@ -3233,11 +3233,11 @@ void cpuset_cpus_allowed(struct task_struct *tsk, struct cpumask *pmask)
> >  {
> >  	unsigned long flags;
> >  
> > -	spin_lock_irqsave(&callback_lock, flags);
> > +	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&callback_lock, flags);
> >  	rcu_read_lock();
> >  	guarantee_online_cpus(task_cs(tsk), pmask);
> >  	rcu_read_unlock();
> > -	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&callback_lock, flags);
> > +	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&callback_lock, flags);
> >  }
> >  
> >  void cpuset_cpus_allowed_fallback(struct task_struct *tsk)
> > @@ -3285,11 +3285,11 @@ nodemask_t cpuset_mems_allowed(struct task_struct *tsk)
> >  	nodemask_t mask;
> >  	unsigned long flags;
> >  
> > -	spin_lock_irqsave(&callback_lock, flags);
> > +	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&callback_lock, flags);
> >  	rcu_read_lock();
> >  	guarantee_online_mems(task_cs(tsk), &mask);
> >  	rcu_read_unlock();
> > -	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&callback_lock, flags);
> > +	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&callback_lock, flags);
> >  
> >  	return mask;
> >  }
> > @@ -3381,14 +3381,14 @@ bool __cpuset_node_allowed(int node, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> >  		return true;
> >  
> >  	/* Not hardwall and node outside mems_allowed: scan up cpusets */
> > -	spin_lock_irqsave(&callback_lock, flags);
> > +	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&callback_lock, flags);
> >  
> >  	rcu_read_lock();
> >  	cs = nearest_hardwall_ancestor(task_cs(current));
> >  	allowed = node_isset(node, cs->mems_allowed);
> >  	rcu_read_unlock();
> >  
> > -	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&callback_lock, flags);
> > +	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&callback_lock, flags);
> >  	return allowed;
> >  }
> 
> These three appear to be a user-controlled O(n) (depth of cgroup tree).
> Which is basically bad for raw_spinlock_t.
> 
> The Changelog should really have mentioned this; and ideally we'd
> somehow avoid this.

N/m avoiding it; we have this all over the place, just mention it..