linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [GIT PULL] sched: Fix missing preemption opportunity
@ 2015-01-22 17:08 Frederic Weisbecker
  2015-01-23  9:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
  2015-02-01 17:52 ` [tip:sched/core] " tip-bot for Frederic Weisbecker
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Frederic Weisbecker @ 2015-01-22 17:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ingo Molnar; +Cc: LKML, Frederic Weisbecker, Peter Zijlstra, Linus Torvalds

Ingo,

Please pull the sched/urgent branch that can be found at:

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/frederic/linux-dynticks.git
	sched/urgent

HEAD: 4ccbe99852951957419bc616f888e297a478e50b

It's part of the preempt/schedule cleanups series suggested by Linus. I'm reworking
these but this one commit is an exception because it's a bugfix. So I'm sending it
now. I believe it's not a regression so it's perhaps too late for -rc5. I let you
judge. The commit is based on -rc5 so it can be merged on sched/core otherwise.

Thanks,
	Frederic
---

Frederic Weisbecker (1):
      sched: Fix missing preemption check in cond_resched()


 kernel/sched/core.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++---------------------
 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)

---
commit 4ccbe99852951957419bc616f888e297a478e50b
Author: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Date:   Sun Dec 14 22:04:47 2014 +0100

    sched: Fix missing preemption check in cond_resched()
    
    If an interrupt fires in cond_resched(), between the call to __schedule()
    and the PREEMPT_ACTIVE count decrementation, and that interrupt sets
    TIF_NEED_RESCHED, the call to preempt_schedule_irq() will be ignored
    due to the PREEMPT_ACTIVE count. This kind of scenario, with irq preemption
    being delayed because it's interrupting a preempt-disabled area, is
    usually fixed up after preemption is re-enabled back with an explicit
    call to preempt_schedule().
    
    This is what preempt_enable() does but a raw preempt count decrement as
    performed by __preempt_count_sub(PREEMPT_ACTIVE) doesn't handle delayed
    preemption check. Therefore when such a race happens, the rescheduling
    is going to be delayed until the next scheduler or preemption entrypoint.
    This can be a problem for scheduler latency sensitive workloads.
    
    Lets fix that by consolidating cond_resched() with preempt_schedule()
    internals.
    
    Reported-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
    Reported-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
    Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
    Original-patch-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
    Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>

diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index c0accc0..c7ed25d 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -2877,6 +2877,21 @@ void __sched schedule_preempt_disabled(void)
 	preempt_disable();
 }
 
+static void preempt_schedule_common(void)
+{
+	do {
+		__preempt_count_add(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
+		__schedule();
+		__preempt_count_sub(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
+
+		/*
+		 * Check again in case we missed a preemption opportunity
+		 * between schedule and now.
+		 */
+		barrier();
+	} while (need_resched());
+}
+
 #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT
 /*
  * this is the entry point to schedule() from in-kernel preemption
@@ -2892,17 +2907,7 @@ asmlinkage __visible void __sched notrace preempt_schedule(void)
 	if (likely(!preemptible()))
 		return;
 
-	do {
-		__preempt_count_add(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
-		__schedule();
-		__preempt_count_sub(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
-
-		/*
-		 * Check again in case we missed a preemption opportunity
-		 * between schedule and now.
-		 */
-		barrier();
-	} while (need_resched());
+	preempt_schedule_common();
 }
 NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(preempt_schedule);
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(preempt_schedule);
@@ -4202,17 +4207,10 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE0(sched_yield)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-static void __cond_resched(void)
-{
-	__preempt_count_add(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
-	__schedule();
-	__preempt_count_sub(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
-}
-
 int __sched _cond_resched(void)
 {
 	if (should_resched()) {
-		__cond_resched();
+		preempt_schedule_common();
 		return 1;
 	}
 	return 0;
@@ -4237,7 +4235,7 @@ int __cond_resched_lock(spinlock_t *lock)
 	if (spin_needbreak(lock) || resched) {
 		spin_unlock(lock);
 		if (resched)
-			__cond_resched();
+			preempt_schedule_common();
 		else
 			cpu_relax();
 		ret = 1;
@@ -4253,7 +4251,7 @@ int __sched __cond_resched_softirq(void)
 
 	if (should_resched()) {
 		local_bh_enable();
-		__cond_resched();
+		preempt_schedule_common();
 		local_bh_disable();
 		return 1;
 	}

^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [GIT PULL] sched: Fix missing preemption opportunity
  2015-01-22 17:08 [GIT PULL] sched: Fix missing preemption opportunity Frederic Weisbecker
@ 2015-01-23  9:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
  2015-01-23 15:07   ` Frederic Weisbecker
  2015-02-01 17:52 ` [tip:sched/core] " tip-bot for Frederic Weisbecker
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Peter Zijlstra @ 2015-01-23  9:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Frederic Weisbecker; +Cc: Ingo Molnar, LKML, Linus Torvalds


I picked up the patch; will drop it if Ingo also does ;-)

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 06:08:04PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -2877,6 +2877,21 @@ void __sched schedule_preempt_disabled(void)
>  	preempt_disable();
>  }
>  
> +static void preempt_schedule_common(void)
> +{
> +	do {
> +		__preempt_count_add(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
> +		__schedule();
> +		__preempt_count_sub(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * Check again in case we missed a preemption opportunity
> +		 * between schedule and now.
> +		 */
> +		barrier();

I do however wonder about this barrier() here; why do we think we need
it?

Is that because test_bit() it 'broken'? The bitops are typically atomic
ops and atomic reads should be through a volatile cast (x86
constant_test_bit doesn't seem to do this).

Should we go audit and fix that?

> +	} while (need_resched());
> +}

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [GIT PULL] sched: Fix missing preemption opportunity
  2015-01-23  9:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
@ 2015-01-23 15:07   ` Frederic Weisbecker
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Frederic Weisbecker @ 2015-01-23 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Peter Zijlstra; +Cc: Ingo Molnar, LKML, Linus Torvalds

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 10:13:53AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> I picked up the patch; will drop it if Ingo also does ;-)
> 
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 06:08:04PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > @@ -2877,6 +2877,21 @@ void __sched schedule_preempt_disabled(void)
> >  	preempt_disable();
> >  }
> >  
> > +static void preempt_schedule_common(void)
> > +{
> > +	do {
> > +		__preempt_count_add(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
> > +		__schedule();
> > +		__preempt_count_sub(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
> > +
> > +		/*
> > +		 * Check again in case we missed a preemption opportunity
> > +		 * between schedule and now.
> > +		 */
> > +		barrier();
> 
> I do however wonder about this barrier() here; why do we think we need
> it?
> 
> Is that because test_bit() it 'broken'? The bitops are typically atomic
> ops and atomic reads should be through a volatile cast (x86
> constant_test_bit doesn't seem to do this).
> 
> Should we go audit and fix that?

I looked up with git blame and this was already there prior the first git commit v2.6.12
without appropriate explanation.

We must make sure that the PREEMPT_ACTIVE decrement is visible before we do the NEED_RESCHED
test or an interrupt could spuriously miss a preempt_schedule_irq() opportunity.

__preempt_count_sub() in asm-generic is an inline, so an implicit barrier(). Only x86
overwrites it yet and it does so through an inline as well.

And __preempt_count_ops() must really imply a barrier() anyway, anything else would
be insane (probably we should specify that in a comment somewhere). Although I see
that responsability is taken from non-underscored callers...

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* [tip:sched/core] sched: Fix missing preemption opportunity
  2015-01-22 17:08 [GIT PULL] sched: Fix missing preemption opportunity Frederic Weisbecker
  2015-01-23  9:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
@ 2015-02-01 17:52 ` tip-bot for Frederic Weisbecker
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: tip-bot for Frederic Weisbecker @ 2015-02-01 17:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-tip-commits
  Cc: fweisbec, hpa, linux-kernel, peterz, mingo, torvalds, tglx

Commit-ID:  a18b5d01819235629289212ad428a5ee2b40f0d9
Gitweb:     http://git.kernel.org/tip/a18b5d01819235629289212ad428a5ee2b40f0d9
Author:     Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
AuthorDate: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 18:08:04 +0100
Committer:  Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
CommitDate: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 19:38:51 +0100

sched: Fix missing preemption opportunity

If an interrupt fires in cond_resched(), between the call to __schedule()
and the PREEMPT_ACTIVE count decrementation, and that interrupt sets
TIF_NEED_RESCHED, the call to preempt_schedule_irq() will be ignored
due to the PREEMPT_ACTIVE count. This kind of scenario, with irq preemption
being delayed because it's interrupting a preempt-disabled area, is
usually fixed up after preemption is re-enabled back with an explicit
call to preempt_schedule().

This is what preempt_enable() does but a raw preempt count decrement as
performed by __preempt_count_sub(PREEMPT_ACTIVE) doesn't handle delayed
preemption check. Therefore when such a race happens, the rescheduling
is going to be delayed until the next scheduler or preemption entrypoint.
This can be a problem for scheduler latency sensitive workloads.

Lets fix that by consolidating cond_resched() with preempt_schedule()
internals.

Reported-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Reported-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Original-patch-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1421946484-9298-1-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
---
 kernel/sched/core.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++---------------------
 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index 0b591fe..54dce01 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -2884,6 +2884,21 @@ void __sched schedule_preempt_disabled(void)
 	preempt_disable();
 }
 
+static void preempt_schedule_common(void)
+{
+	do {
+		__preempt_count_add(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
+		__schedule();
+		__preempt_count_sub(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
+
+		/*
+		 * Check again in case we missed a preemption opportunity
+		 * between schedule and now.
+		 */
+		barrier();
+	} while (need_resched());
+}
+
 #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT
 /*
  * this is the entry point to schedule() from in-kernel preemption
@@ -2899,17 +2914,7 @@ asmlinkage __visible void __sched notrace preempt_schedule(void)
 	if (likely(!preemptible()))
 		return;
 
-	do {
-		__preempt_count_add(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
-		__schedule();
-		__preempt_count_sub(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
-
-		/*
-		 * Check again in case we missed a preemption opportunity
-		 * between schedule and now.
-		 */
-		barrier();
-	} while (need_resched());
+	preempt_schedule_common();
 }
 NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(preempt_schedule);
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(preempt_schedule);
@@ -4209,17 +4214,10 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE0(sched_yield)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-static void __cond_resched(void)
-{
-	__preempt_count_add(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
-	__schedule();
-	__preempt_count_sub(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
-}
-
 int __sched _cond_resched(void)
 {
 	if (should_resched()) {
-		__cond_resched();
+		preempt_schedule_common();
 		return 1;
 	}
 	return 0;
@@ -4244,7 +4242,7 @@ int __cond_resched_lock(spinlock_t *lock)
 	if (spin_needbreak(lock) || resched) {
 		spin_unlock(lock);
 		if (resched)
-			__cond_resched();
+			preempt_schedule_common();
 		else
 			cpu_relax();
 		ret = 1;
@@ -4260,7 +4258,7 @@ int __sched __cond_resched_softirq(void)
 
 	if (should_resched()) {
 		local_bh_enable();
-		__cond_resched();
+		preempt_schedule_common();
 		local_bh_disable();
 		return 1;
 	}

^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2015-02-01 17:53 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-01-22 17:08 [GIT PULL] sched: Fix missing preemption opportunity Frederic Weisbecker
2015-01-23  9:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-01-23 15:07   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2015-02-01 17:52 ` [tip:sched/core] " tip-bot for Frederic Weisbecker

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).