From: Pingfan Liu <piliu@redhat.com>
To: Chen Ridong <chenridong@huaweicloud.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
"Waiman Long" <longman@redhat.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Juri Lelli" <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
"Pierre Gondois" <pierre.gondois@arm.com>,
"Frederic Weisbecker" <frederic@kernel.org>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>, "Tejun Heo" <tj@kernel.org>,
"Johannes Weiner" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
"Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>,
"Vincent Guittot" <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
"Dietmar Eggemann" <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
"Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
"Ben Segall" <bsegall@google.com>, "Mel Gorman" <mgorman@suse.de>,
"Valentin Schneider" <vschneid@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 2/2] sched/deadline: Walk up cpuset hierarchy to decide root domain when hot-unplug
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2025 11:17:39 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aQge00u94JKGF9Tb@fedora> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aQTF1kLXNHncCCDB@fedora>
Hi Ridong,
I have some further findings. Your thoughts would be really
helpful!
On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 10:21:10PM +0800, Pingfan Liu wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 08:47:14AM +0800, Chen Ridong wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2025/10/30 18:45, Pingfan Liu wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 02:44:43PM +0800, Chen Ridong wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 2025/10/29 19:18, Pingfan Liu wrote:
> > >>> Hi Ridong,
> > >>>
> > >>> Thank you for your review, please see the comment below.
> > >>>
> > >>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 10:37:47AM +0800, Chen Ridong wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On 2025/10/28 11:43, Pingfan Liu wrote:
> > >>>>> *** Bug description ***
> > >>>>> When testing kexec-reboot on a 144 cpus machine with
> > >>>>> isolcpus=managed_irq,domain,1-71,73-143 in kernel command line, I
> > >>>>> encounter the following bug:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> [ 97.114759] psci: CPU142 killed (polled 0 ms)
> > >>>>> [ 97.333236] Failed to offline CPU143 - error=-16
> > >>>>> [ 97.333246] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > >>>>> [ 97.342682] kernel BUG at kernel/cpu.c:1569!
> > >>>>> [ 97.347049] Internal error: Oops - BUG: 00000000f2000800 [#1] SMP
> > >>>>> [...]
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> In essence, the issue originates from the CPU hot-removal process, not
> > >>>>> limited to kexec. It can be reproduced by writing a SCHED_DEADLINE
> > >>>>> program that waits indefinitely on a semaphore, spawning multiple
> > >>>>> instances to ensure some run on CPU 72, and then offlining CPUs 1–143
> > >>>>> one by one. When attempting this, CPU 143 failed to go offline.
> > >>>>> bash -c 'taskset -cp 0 $$ && for i in {1..143}; do echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu$i/online 2>/dev/null; done'
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> `
> > >>>>> *** Issue ***
> > >>>>> Tracking down this issue, I found that dl_bw_deactivate() returned
> > >>>>> -EBUSY, which caused sched_cpu_deactivate() to fail on the last CPU.
> > >>>>> But that is not the fact, and contributed by the following factors:
> > >>>>> When a CPU is inactive, cpu_rq()->rd is set to def_root_domain. For an
> > >>>>> blocked-state deadline task (in this case, "cppc_fie"), it was not
> > >>>>> migrated to CPU0, and its task_rq() information is stale. So its rq->rd
> > >>>>> points to def_root_domain instead of the one shared with CPU0. As a
> > >>>>> result, its bandwidth is wrongly accounted into a wrong root domain
> > >>>>> during domain rebuild.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The key point is that root_domain is only tracked through active rq->rd.
> > >>>>> To avoid using a global data structure to track all root_domains in the
> > >>>>> system, there should be a method to locate an active CPU within the
> > >>>>> corresponding root_domain.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> *** Solution ***
> > >>>>> To locate the active cpu, the following rules for deadline
> > >>>>> sub-system is useful
> > >>>>> -1.any cpu belongs to a unique root domain at a given time
> > >>>>> -2.DL bandwidth checker ensures that the root domain has active cpus.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Now, let's examine the blocked-state task P.
> > >>>>> If P is attached to a cpuset that is a partition root, it is
> > >>>>> straightforward to find an active CPU.
> > >>>>> If P is attached to a cpuset that has changed from 'root' to 'member',
> > >>>>> the active CPUs are grouped into the parent root domain. Naturally, the
> > >>>>> CPUs' capacity and reserved DL bandwidth are taken into account in the
> > >>>>> ancestor root domain. (In practice, it may be unsafe to attach P to an
> > >>>>> arbitrary root domain, since that domain may lack sufficient DL
> > >>>>> bandwidth for P.) Again, it is straightforward to find an active CPU in
> > >>>>> the ancestor root domain.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> This patch groups CPUs into isolated and housekeeping sets. For the
> > >>>>> housekeeping group, it walks up the cpuset hierarchy to find active CPUs
> > >>>>> in P's root domain and retrieves the valid rd from cpu_rq(cpu)->rd.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Pingfan Liu <piliu@redhat.com>
> > >>>>> Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
> > >>>>> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
> > >>>>> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> > >>>>> Cc: "Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>
> > >>>>> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
> > >>>>> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> > >>>>> Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
> > >>>>> Cc: Pierre Gondois <pierre.gondois@arm.com>
> > >>>>> Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
> > >>>>> Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
> > >>>>> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> > >>>>> Cc: Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>
> > >>>>> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
> > >>>>> Cc: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
> > >>>>> To: cgroups@vger.kernel.org
> > >>>>> To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> > >>>>> ---
> > >>>>> v3 -> v4:
> > >>>>> rename function with cpuset_ prefix
> > >>>>> improve commit log
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> include/linux/cpuset.h | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
> > >>>>> kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >>>>> kernel/sched/deadline.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> > >>>>> 3 files changed, 68 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/cpuset.h b/include/linux/cpuset.h
> > >>>>> index 2ddb256187b51..d4da93e51b37b 100644
> > >>>>> --- a/include/linux/cpuset.h
> > >>>>> +++ b/include/linux/cpuset.h
> > >>>>> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
> > >>>>> #include <linux/sched.h>
> > >>>>> #include <linux/sched/topology.h>
> > >>>>> #include <linux/sched/task.h>
> > >>>>> +#include <linux/sched/housekeeping.h>
> > >>>>> #include <linux/cpumask.h>
> > >>>>> #include <linux/nodemask.h>
> > >>>>> #include <linux/mm.h>
> > >>>>> @@ -130,6 +131,7 @@ extern void rebuild_sched_domains(void);
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> extern void cpuset_print_current_mems_allowed(void);
> > >>>>> extern void cpuset_reset_sched_domains(void);
> > >>>>> +extern void cpuset_get_task_effective_cpus(struct task_struct *p, struct cpumask *cpus);
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> /*
> > >>>>> * read_mems_allowed_begin is required when making decisions involving
> > >>>>> @@ -276,6 +278,22 @@ static inline void cpuset_reset_sched_domains(void)
> > >>>>> partition_sched_domains(1, NULL, NULL);
> > >>>>> }
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> +static inline void cpuset_get_task_effective_cpus(struct task_struct *p,
> > >>>>> + struct cpumask *cpus)
> > >>>>> +{
> > >>>>> + const struct cpumask *hk_msk;
> > >>>>> +
> > >>>>> + hk_msk = housekeeping_cpumask(HK_TYPE_DOMAIN);
> > >>>>> + if (housekeeping_enabled(HK_TYPE_DOMAIN)) {
> > >>>>> + if (!cpumask_intersects(p->cpus_ptr, hk_msk)) {
> > >>>>> + /* isolated cpus belong to a root domain */
> > >>>>> + cpumask_andnot(cpus, cpu_active_mask, hk_msk);
> > >>>>> + return;
> > >>>>> + }
> > >>>>> + }
> > >>>>> + cpumask_and(cpus, cpu_active_mask, hk_msk);
> > >>>>> +}
> > >>>>> +
> > >>>>> static inline void cpuset_print_current_mems_allowed(void)
> > >>>>> {
> > >>>>> }
> > >>>>> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> > >>>>> index 27adb04df675d..6ad88018f1a4e 100644
> > >>>>> --- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> > >>>>> +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> > >>>>> @@ -1102,6 +1102,32 @@ void cpuset_reset_sched_domains(void)
> > >>>>> mutex_unlock(&cpuset_mutex);
> > >>>>> }
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> +/* caller hold RCU read lock */
> > >>>>> +void cpuset_get_task_effective_cpus(struct task_struct *p, struct cpumask *cpus)
> > >>>>> +{
> > >>>>> + const struct cpumask *hk_msk;
> > >>>>> + struct cpuset *cs;
> > >>>>> +
> > >>>>> + hk_msk = housekeeping_cpumask(HK_TYPE_DOMAIN);
> > >>>>> + if (housekeeping_enabled(HK_TYPE_DOMAIN)) {
> > >>>>> + if (!cpumask_intersects(p->cpus_ptr, hk_msk)) {
> > >>>>> + /* isolated cpus belong to a root domain */
> > >>>>> + cpumask_andnot(cpus, cpu_active_mask, hk_msk);
> > >>>>> + return;
> > >>>>> + }
> > >>>>> + }
> > >>>>> + /* In HK_TYPE_DOMAIN, cpuset can be applied */
> > >>>>> + cs = task_cs(p);
> > >>>>> + while (cs != &top_cpuset) {
> > >>>>> + if (is_sched_load_balance(cs))
> > >>>>> + break;
> > >>>>> + cs = parent_cs(cs);
> > >>>>> + }
> > >>>>> +
> > >>>>> + /* For top_cpuset, its effective_cpus does not exclude isolated cpu */
> > >>>>> + cpumask_and(cpus, cs->effective_cpus, hk_msk);
> > >>>>> +}
> > >>>>> +
> > >>>>
> > >>>> It seems you may have misunderstood what Longman intended to convey.
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks for pointing that out. That is possible and please let me address
> > >>> your concern.
> > >>>
> > >>>> First, you should add comments to this function because its purpose is not clear. When I first saw
> > >>>
> > >>> OK, I will.
> > >>>
> > >>>> this function, I thought it was supposed to retrieve p->cpus_ptr excluding the offline CPU mask.
> > >>>> However, I'm genuinely confused about the function's actual purpose.
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> This function retrieves the active CPUs within the root domain where a specified task resides.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Thank you for the further clarification.
> > >>
> > >> + /*
> > >> + * If @p is in blocked state, task_cpu() may be not active. In that
> > >> + * case, rq->rd does not trace a correct root_domain. On the other hand,
> > >> + * @p must belong to an root_domain at any given time, which must have
> > >> + * active rq, whose rq->rd traces the valid root domain.
> > >> + */
> > >>
> > >> Is it necessary to walk up to the root partition (is_sched_load_balance(cs))?
> > >>
> > >> The effective_cpus of the cpuset where @p resides should contain active CPUs.
> > >> If all CPUs in cpuset.cpus are offline, it would inherit the parent's effective_cpus for v2, and it
> > >> would move the task to the parent for v1.
> > >>
>
> I located the code which implemented your comment. And I think for v2,
> you are right. But for v1, there is an async nuance about
> remove_tasks_in_empty_cpuset(). It is scheduled with a work_struct, so
> there is no gurantee that task has been moved to ancestor cpuset before
> rebuild_sched_domains_cpuslocked() is called in cpuset_handle_hotplug(),
> which means that in dl_update_tasks_root_domain(), maybe task's cpuset
> has not been updated yet.
>
This behavior requires two set of implements for the new introduced
function, one for cpuset V1 due to async, one for v2 which can fetch the
active cpus from p->cpus_ptr directly.
Apart from this drawback, the call sequence of functions matters when
the logic enters the scheduler code for the hot-removal path. The newly
introduced function should be called after cpuset propagation.
Best Regards,
Pingfan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-03 3:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20251028034357.11055-1-piliu@redhat.com>
2025-10-28 3:43 ` [PATCHv4 2/2] sched/deadline: Walk up cpuset hierarchy to decide root domain when hot-unplug Pingfan Liu
2025-10-29 2:37 ` Chen Ridong
2025-10-29 11:18 ` Pingfan Liu
2025-10-30 6:44 ` Chen Ridong
2025-10-30 10:45 ` Pingfan Liu
2025-10-31 0:47 ` Chen Ridong
2025-10-31 14:21 ` Pingfan Liu
2025-11-03 3:17 ` Pingfan Liu [this message]
2025-10-29 15:31 ` Waiman Long
2025-10-30 10:41 ` Pingfan Liu
2025-11-03 13:50 ` Juri Lelli
2025-11-04 3:34 ` Pingfan Liu
2025-11-04 3:42 ` Waiman Long
2025-11-05 2:23 ` Chen Ridong
2025-11-05 7:11 ` Pingfan Liu
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=aQge00u94JKGF9Tb@fedora \
--to=piliu@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chenridong@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pierre.gondois@arm.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox