public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH,RFC] sched: fix "impossible" load balancing oops
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 12:19:35 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150825101935.GP16853@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150821142138.57b5a7c3@riellap.home.surriel.com>

On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 02:21:22PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> The load balancing code can run into the situation where
> the source and destination runqueues are the same, in
> the active balancing code.
> 
>         /*
>          * This condition is "impossible", if it occurs
>          * we need to fix it. Originally reported by
>          * Bjorn Helgaas on a 128-cpu setup.
>          */
>         BUG_ON(busiest_rq == target_rq);
> 
> This happens despite not triggering the BUG_ON(busiest == env.dst_rq)
> line after find_busiest_queue.
> 
> From code inspection, it appears there is a condition where this can happen.
> 
> Specifically, if we encounter only pinned tasks on a CPU, can_migrate_task
> will set env->new_dst_cpu to a CPU in the env->dst_grpmask.  If the group
> includes the source cpu, we may end up setting env.dst_cpu to the same
> as dst.src_cpu.
> 
> The fix would be to clear the source cpu from env.dst_grpmask, to ensure
> we never select the source cpu as the destination.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/fair.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index d113c3b..514a369 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -7172,6 +7172,8 @@ redo:
>  	env.src_cpu = busiest->cpu;
>  	env.src_rq = busiest;
>  
> +	cpumask_clear_cpu(busiest->cpu, env.dst_grpmask);
> +
>  	ld_moved = 0;
>  	if (busiest->nr_running > 1) {
>  		/*

Right, so real problem 'recently' introduced by:

  88b8dac0a14c ("sched: Improve balance_cpu() to consider other cpus in its group as target of (pinned) task")

But I think there's a wee problem with the solution, if I'm not still
entirely asleep, it appears dst_grpmask might be NULL in case of
CPU_NEWLY_IDLE, which would make that cpumask_clear_cpu() do something
naughty.

  reply	other threads:[~2015-08-25 10:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-08-21 18:21 [PATCH,RFC] sched: fix "impossible" load balancing oops Rik van Riel
2015-08-25 10:19 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2015-08-25 18:03   ` Rik van Riel

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=20150825101935.GP16853@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=riel@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