public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Josh Don <joshdon@google.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
	Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Josh Don <joshdon@google.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] sched: fix warning in bandwidth distribution
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2023 16:05:35 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230922230535.296350-2-joshdon@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230922230535.296350-1-joshdon@google.com>

We've observed the following warning being hit in
distribute_cfs_runtime():
	SCHED_WARN_ON(cfs_rq->runtime_remaining > 0)

We have the following race:

- cpu0: running bandwidth distribution (distribute_cfs_runtime).
  Inspects the local cfs_rq and makes its runtime_remaining positive.
  However, we defer unthrottling the local cfs_rq until after
  considering all remote cfs_rq's.
- cpu1: starts running bandwidth distribution from the slack timer. When
  it finds the cfs_rq for cpu 0 on the throttled list, it observers the
  that the cfs_rq is throttled, yet is not on the CSD list, and has a
  positive runtime_remaining, thus triggering the warning in
  distribute_cfs_runtime.

To fix this, we can rework the local unthrottling logic to put the local
cfs_rq on a local list, so that any future bandwidth distributions will
realize that the cfs_rq is about to be unthrottled.

Signed-off-by: Josh Don <joshdon@google.com>
---
 kernel/sched/fair.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 8f4e63fc8900..de002dab28cf 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -5743,13 +5743,13 @@ static void unthrottle_cfs_rq_async(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
 
 static bool distribute_cfs_runtime(struct cfs_bandwidth *cfs_b)
 {
-	struct cfs_rq *local_unthrottle = NULL;
 	int this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
 	u64 runtime, remaining = 1;
 	bool throttled = false;
-	struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq;
+	struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, *tmp;
 	struct rq_flags rf;
 	struct rq *rq;
+	LIST_HEAD(local_unthrottle);
 
 	rcu_read_lock();
 	list_for_each_entry_rcu(cfs_rq, &cfs_b->throttled_cfs_rq,
@@ -5784,11 +5784,17 @@ static bool distribute_cfs_runtime(struct cfs_bandwidth *cfs_b)
 
 		/* we check whether we're throttled above */
 		if (cfs_rq->runtime_remaining > 0) {
-			if (cpu_of(rq) != this_cpu ||
-			    SCHED_WARN_ON(local_unthrottle))
+			if (cpu_of(rq) != this_cpu) {
 				unthrottle_cfs_rq_async(cfs_rq);
-			else
-				local_unthrottle = cfs_rq;
+			} else {
+				/*
+				 * We currently only expect to be unthrottling
+				 * a single cfs_rq locally.
+				 */
+				SCHED_WARN_ON(!list_empty(&local_unthrottle));
+				list_add_tail(&cfs_rq->throttled_csd_list,
+					      &local_unthrottle);
+			}
 		} else {
 			throttled = true;
 		}
@@ -5796,15 +5802,23 @@ static bool distribute_cfs_runtime(struct cfs_bandwidth *cfs_b)
 next:
 		rq_unlock_irqrestore(rq, &rf);
 	}
-	rcu_read_unlock();
 
-	if (local_unthrottle) {
-		rq = cpu_rq(this_cpu);
+	list_for_each_entry_safe(cfs_rq, tmp, &local_unthrottle,
+				 throttled_csd_list) {
+		struct rq *rq = rq_of(cfs_rq);
+
 		rq_lock_irqsave(rq, &rf);
-		if (cfs_rq_throttled(local_unthrottle))
-			unthrottle_cfs_rq(local_unthrottle);
+
+		list_del_init(&cfs_rq->throttled_csd_list);
+
+		if (cfs_rq_throttled(cfs_rq))
+			unthrottle_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
+
 		rq_unlock_irqrestore(rq, &rf);
 	}
+	SCHED_WARN_ON(!list_empty(&local_unthrottle));
+
+	rcu_read_unlock();
 
 	return throttled;
 }
-- 
2.42.0.515.g380fc7ccd1-goog


  reply	other threads:[~2023-09-22 23:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-09-22 23:05 [PATCH 1/2] sched: make cfs_rq->throttled_csd_list available on !SMP Josh Don
2023-09-22 23:05 ` Josh Don [this message]
2023-09-24 10:12   ` [PATCH 2/2] sched: fix warning in bandwidth distribution Ingo Molnar
2023-09-25 16:38     ` Josh Don
2023-09-24 10:39   ` [tip: sched/core] sched/fair: Fix " tip-bot2 for Josh Don
2023-09-24 10:39 ` [tip: sched/core] sched/fair: Make cfs_rq->throttled_csd_list available on !SMP tip-bot2 for Josh Don

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=20230922230535.296350-2-joshdon@google.com \
    --to=joshdon@google.com \
    --cc=bristot@redhat.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.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