linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
To: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Cc: Connor O'Brien <connoro@google.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@android.com,
	John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>,
	Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	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>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 07/11] sched: Add proxy execution
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 00:22:03 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y3rEq7IFKjYA+/bj@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4ec6ab79-9f0f-e14b-dd06-d2840a1bf71a@arm.com>

Hello Dietmar,

On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 06:09:26PM +0100, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> On 31/10/2022 19:00, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 05:39:45PM +0100, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> >> On 29/10/2022 05:31, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> >>> Hello Dietmar,
> >>>
> >>>> On Oct 24, 2022, at 6:13 AM, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 03/10/2022 23:44, Connor O'Brien wrote:
> >>>>> From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> 
> [...]
> 
> >>>>> +    rq_unpin_lock(rq, rf);
> >>>>> +    raw_spin_rq_unlock(rq);
> >>>>
> >>>> Don't we run into rq_pin_lock()'s:
> >>>>
> >>>> SCHED_WARN_ON(rq->balance_callback && rq->balance_callback !=
> >>>> &balance_push_callback)
> >>>>
> >>>> by releasing rq lock between queue_balance_callback(, push_rt/dl_tasks)
> >>>> and __balance_callbacks()?
> >>>
> >>> Apologies, I’m a bit lost here. The code you are responding to inline does not call rq_pin_lock, it calls rq_unpin_lock.  So what scenario does the warning trigger according to you?
> >>
> >> True, but the code which sneaks in between proxy()'s
> >> raw_spin_rq_unlock(rq) and raw_spin_rq_lock(rq) does.
> >>
> > 
> > Got it now, thanks a lot for clarifying. Can this be fixed by do a
> > __balance_callbacks() at:
> 
> I tried the: 
> 
>    head = splice_balance_callbacks(rq)
>    task_rq_unlock(rq, p, &rf);
>    ...
>    balance_callbacks(rq, head);
> 
> separation known from __sched_setscheduler() in __schedule() (right
> after pick_next_task()) but it doesn't work. Lot of `BUG: scheduling
> while atomic:`

How about something like the following? This should exclude concurrent
balance callback queues from other CPUs and let us release the rq lock early
in proxy(). I ran locktorture with your diff to make writer threads RT, and I
cannot reproduce any crash with it:

---8<-----------------------

From: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Subject: [PATCH] Exclude balance callback queuing during proxy's migrate

In commit 565790d28b1e ("sched: Fix balance_callback()"), it is clear that rq
lock needs to be held when __balance_callbacks() in schedule() is called.
However, it is possible that because rq lock is dropped in proxy(), another
CPU, say in __sched_setscheduler() can queue balancing callbacks and cause
issues.

To remedy this, exclude balance callback queuing on other CPUs, during the
proxy().

Reported-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org>
---
 kernel/sched/core.c  | 15 +++++++++++++++
 kernel/sched/sched.h |  3 +++
 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index 88a5fa34dc06..f1dac21fcd90 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -6739,6 +6739,10 @@ proxy(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *next, struct rq_flags *rf)
 		p->wake_cpu = wake_cpu;
 	}
 
+	// Prevent other CPUs from queuing balance callbacks while we migrate
+	// tasks in the migrate_list with the rq lock released.
+	raw_spin_lock(&rq->balance_lock);
+
 	rq_unpin_lock(rq, rf);
 	raw_spin_rq_unlock(rq);
 	raw_spin_rq_lock(that_rq);
@@ -6758,7 +6762,18 @@ proxy(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *next, struct rq_flags *rf)
 	}
 
 	raw_spin_rq_unlock(that_rq);
+
+	// This may make lockdep unhappy as we acquire rq->lock with balance_lock
+	// held. But that should be a false positive, as the following pattern
+	// happens only on the current CPU with interrupts disabled:
+	// rq_lock()
+	// balance_lock();
+	// rq_unlock();
+	// rq_lock();
 	raw_spin_rq_lock(rq);
+
+	raw_spin_unlock(&rq->balance_lock);
+
 	rq_repin_lock(rq, rf);
 
 	return NULL; /* Retry task selection on _this_ CPU. */
diff --git a/kernel/sched/sched.h b/kernel/sched/sched.h
index 354e75587fed..932d32bf9571 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
+++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
@@ -1057,6 +1057,7 @@ struct rq {
 	unsigned long		cpu_capacity_orig;
 
 	struct callback_head	*balance_callback;
+	raw_spinlock_t		balance_lock;
 
 	unsigned char		nohz_idle_balance;
 	unsigned char		idle_balance;
@@ -1748,6 +1749,7 @@ queue_balance_callback(struct rq *rq,
 		       void (*func)(struct rq *rq))
 {
 	lockdep_assert_rq_held(rq);
+	raw_spin_lock(&rq->balance_lock);
 
 	/*
 	 * Don't (re)queue an already queued item; nor queue anything when
@@ -1760,6 +1762,7 @@ queue_balance_callback(struct rq *rq,
 	head->func = (void (*)(struct callback_head *))func;
 	head->next = rq->balance_callback;
 	rq->balance_callback = head;
+	raw_spin_unlock(&rq->balance_lock);
 }
 
 #define rcu_dereference_check_sched_domain(p) \
-- 
2.38.1.584.g0f3c55d4c2-goog


  reply	other threads:[~2022-11-21  0:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 67+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-10-03 21:44 [RFC PATCH 00/11] Reviving the Proxy Execution Series Connor O'Brien
2022-10-03 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH 01/11] locking/ww_mutex: Remove wakeups from under mutex::wait_lock Connor O'Brien
2022-10-04 16:01   ` Waiman Long
2022-10-12 23:54     ` Joel Fernandes
2022-10-20 18:43     ` Connor O'Brien
2022-10-03 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH 02/11] locking/mutex: Rework task_struct::blocked_on Connor O'Brien
2022-10-03 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH 03/11] kernel/locking: Add p->blocked_on wrapper Connor O'Brien
2022-10-03 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH 04/11] locking/mutex: make mutex::wait_lock irq safe Connor O'Brien
2022-10-13  4:30   ` Joel Fernandes
2022-10-03 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH 05/11] sched: Split scheduler execution context Connor O'Brien
2022-10-14 17:01   ` Joel Fernandes
2022-10-19 17:17   ` Valentin Schneider
2022-10-20 18:43     ` Connor O'Brien
2022-10-03 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH 06/11] kernel/locking: Expose mutex_owner() Connor O'Brien
2022-10-03 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH 07/11] sched: Add proxy execution Connor O'Brien
2022-10-12  1:54   ` Joel Fernandes
2022-10-12  9:46     ` Juri Lelli
2022-10-14 17:07     ` Joel Fernandes
2022-10-15 13:53     ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-10-16 20:48       ` Steven Rostedt
2022-10-17  4:03         ` Joel Fernandes
2022-10-17  7:26         ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-10-24 22:33           ` Qais Yousef
2022-10-25 11:19             ` Joel Fernandes
2022-10-25 22:10               ` Qais Yousef
2022-10-15 15:28     ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-10-15 15:08   ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-10-15 15:10   ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-10-15 15:47   ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-10-24 10:13   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2022-10-29  3:31     ` Joel Fernandes
2022-10-31 16:39       ` Dietmar Eggemann
2022-10-31 18:00         ` Joel Fernandes
2022-11-04 17:09           ` Dietmar Eggemann
2022-11-21  0:22             ` Joel Fernandes [this message]
2022-11-21  1:49               ` Joel Fernandes
2022-11-21  3:59                 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-11-22 18:45                   ` Joel Fernandes
2023-01-09  8:51   ` Chen Yu
2022-10-03 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH 08/11] sched: Fixup task CPUs for potential proxies Connor O'Brien
2022-10-03 21:44 ` [RFC PATCH 09/11] sched/rt: Fix proxy/current (push,pull)ability Connor O'Brien
2022-10-10 11:40   ` Valentin Schneider
2022-10-14 22:32     ` Connor O'Brien
2022-10-19 17:05       ` Valentin Schneider
2022-10-20 13:30         ` Juri Lelli
2022-10-20 16:14           ` Valentin Schneider
2022-10-21  2:22         ` Connor O'Brien
2022-10-03 21:45 ` [RFC PATCH 10/11] torture: support randomized shuffling for proxy exec testing Connor O'Brien
2022-11-12 16:54   ` Joel Fernandes
2022-11-14 20:44     ` Connor O'Brien
2022-11-15 16:02       ` Joel Fernandes
2022-10-03 21:45 ` [RFC PATCH 11/11] locktorture: support nested mutexes Connor O'Brien
2022-10-06  9:59 ` [RFC PATCH 00/11] Reviving the Proxy Execution Series Juri Lelli
2022-10-06 10:07   ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-10-06 12:14     ` Juri Lelli
2022-10-15 15:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-10-17  2:23 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-10-19 11:43   ` Qais Yousef
2022-10-19 12:23     ` Joel Fernandes
2022-10-19 13:41       ` Juri Lelli
2022-10-19 13:51         ` Joel Fernandes
2022-10-19 19:30         ` Qais Yousef
2022-10-20  8:51           ` Joel Fernandes
2022-10-17  3:25 ` Chengming Zhou
2022-10-17  3:56   ` Joel Fernandes
2022-10-17  4:26     ` Chengming Zhou
2022-10-17 12:27       ` Joel Fernandes

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=Y3rEq7IFKjYA+/bj@google.com \
    --to=joel@joelfernandes.org \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=bristot@redhat.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=connoro@google.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=jstultz@google.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@android.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=qais.yousef@arm.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
    --cc=will@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).