From: Vikram Mulukutla <markivx@codeaurora.org>
To: rusty@rustcorp.com.au, tj@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kthread: Atomically set completion and perform dequeue in __kthread_parkme
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 16:03:27 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <318fac36-66cd-7f90-df61-44042119ee2e@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1498515483-12743-1-git-send-email-markivx@codeaurora.org>
correcting Thomas Gleixner's email address. s/linuxtronix/linutronix
On 6/26/2017 3:18 PM, Vikram Mulukutla wrote:
> kthread_park waits for the target kthread to park itself with
> __kthread_parkme using a completion variable. __kthread_parkme - which is
> invoked by the target kthread - sets the completion variable before
> calling schedule() to voluntarily get itself off of the runqueue.
>
> This causes an interesting race in the hotplug path. takedown_cpu()
> invoked for CPU_X attempts to park the cpuhp/X hotplug kthread before
> running the stopper thread on CPU_X. kthread_unpark doesn't guarantee that
> cpuhp/X is off of X's runqueue, only that the thread has executed
> __kthread_parkme and set the completion. cpuhp/X may have been preempted
> out before calling schedule() to voluntarily sleep. takedown_cpu proceeds
> to run the stopper thread on CPU_X which promptly migrates off the
> still-on-rq cpuhp/X thread to another cpu CPU_Y, setting its affinity
> mask to something other than CPU_X alone.
>
> This is OK - cpuhp/X may finally get itself off of CPU_Y's runqueue at
> some later point. But if that doesn't happen (for example, if there's
> an RT thread on CPU_Y), the kthread_unpark in a subsequent cpu_up call
> for CPU_X will race with the still-on-rq condition. Even now we're
> functionally OK because there is a wait_task_inactive in the
> kthread_unpark(), BUT the following happens:
>
> [ 12.472745] BUG: scheduling while atomic: swapper/7/0/0x00000002
> [ 12.472749] Modules linked in:
> [ 12.472756] CPU: 7 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/7 Not tainted 4.9.32-perf+ #680
> [ 12.472758] Hardware name: XXXXX
> [ 12.472760] Call trace:
> [ 12.472773] [<ffffff8eb4e87928>] dump_backtrace+0x0/0x198
> [ 12.472777] [<ffffff8eb4e87ad4>] show_stack+0x14/0x1c
> [ 12.472781] [<ffffff8eb516c998>] dump_stack+0x8c/0xac
> [ 12.472786] [<ffffff8eb4ecea28>] __schedule_bug+0x54/0x70
> [ 12.472792] [<ffffff8eb5bbf478>] __schedule+0x6b4/0x928
> [ 12.472794] [<ffffff8eb5bbf728>] schedule+0x3c/0xa0
> [ 12.472797] [<ffffff8eb5bc2950>] schedule_hrtimeout_range_clock+0x80/0xec
> [ 12.472799] [<ffffff8eb5bc29ec>] schedule_hrtimeout+0x18/0x20
> [ 12.472803] [<ffffff8eb4ed3b30>] wait_task_inactive+0x1a0/0x1a4
> [ 12.472806] [<ffffff8eb4ec1b88>] __kthread_bind_mask+0x20/0x7c
> [ 12.472809] [<ffffff8eb4ec1c0c>] __kthread_bind+0x28/0x30
> [ 12.472811] [<ffffff8eb4ec1c88>] __kthread_unpark+0x5c/0x60
> [ 12.472814] [<ffffff8eb4ec1cb0>] kthread_unpark+0x24/0x2c
> [ 12.472818] [<ffffff8eb4ea4a7c>] cpuhp_online_idle+0x50/0x90
> [ 12.472822] [<ffffff8eb4ef2940>] cpu_startup_entry+0x3c/0x1d4
> [ 12.472824] [<ffffff8eb4e8dae4>] secondary_start_kernel+0x164/0x1b4
>
> Since the kthread_unpark is invoked from a preemption-disabled context,
> wait_task_inactive's action of invoking schedule is invalid, causing the
> splat. Note that kthread_bind_mask is correctly attempting to re-set
> the affinity mask since cpuhp is a per-cpu smpboot thread.
>
> Instead of adding an expensive wait_task_inactive inside kthread_park()
> or trying to muck with the hotplug code, let's just ensure that the
> completion variable and the schedule happen atomically inside
> __kthread_parkme. This focuses the fix to the hotplug requirement alone,
> and removes the unnecessary migration of cpuhp/X.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vikram Mulukutla <markivx@codeaurora.org>
> ---
> kernel/kthread.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/kthread.c b/kernel/kthread.c
> index 26db528..7ad3354 100644
> --- a/kernel/kthread.c
> +++ b/kernel/kthread.c
> @@ -171,9 +171,20 @@ static void __kthread_parkme(struct kthread *self)
> {
> __set_current_state(TASK_PARKED);
> while (test_bit(KTHREAD_SHOULD_PARK, &self->flags)) {
> + /*
> + * Why the preempt_disable?
> + * Hotplug needs to ensure that 'self' is off of the runqueue
> + * as well, before scheduling the stopper thread that will
> + * migrate tasks off of the runqeue that 'self' was running on.
> + * This avoids unnecessary migration work and also ensures that
> + * kthread_unpark in the cpu_up path doesn't race with
> + * __kthread_parkme.
> + */
> + preempt_disable();
> if (!test_and_set_bit(KTHREAD_IS_PARKED, &self->flags))
> complete(&self->parked);
> - schedule();
> + schedule_preempt_disabled();
> + preempt_enable();
> __set_current_state(TASK_PARKED);
> }
> clear_bit(KTHREAD_IS_PARKED, &self->flags);
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-06-26 23:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-26 22:18 [PATCH] kthread: Atomically set completion and perform dequeue in __kthread_parkme Vikram Mulukutla
2017-06-26 23:03 ` Vikram Mulukutla [this message]
2017-06-28 14:05 ` Vikram Mulukutla
2017-07-04 19:49 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-07-05 17:23 ` Vikram Mulukutla
2017-07-04 16:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-05 17:21 ` Vikram Mulukutla
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=318fac36-66cd-7f90-df61-44042119ee2e@codeaurora.org \
--to=markivx@codeaurora.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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