From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
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, Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>,
kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>,
aubrey.li@linux.intel.com, yu.c.chen@intel.com,
paulmck@kernel.org, quic_neeraju@quicinc.com,
joel@joelfernandes.org, josh@joshtriplett.org,
boqun.feng@gmail.com, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
jiangshanlai@gmail.com, qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Don't call any kfree*() API in do_set_cpus_allowed()
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2023 11:52:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZUDcdlrvCEPpQWUe@lothringen> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231031085308.GB35651@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 09:53:08AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 08:14:18PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> > Commit 851a723e45d1 ("sched: Always clear user_cpus_ptr in
> > do_set_cpus_allowed()") added a kfree() call to free any user
> > provided affinity mask, if present. It was changed later to use
> > kfree_rcu() in commit 9a5418bc48ba ("sched/core: Use kfree_rcu()
> > in do_set_cpus_allowed()") to avoid a circular locking dependency
> > problem.
> >
> > It turns out that even kfree_rcu() isn't safe for avoiding
> > circular locking problem. As reported by kernel test robot,
> > the following circular locking dependency still exists:
> >
> > &rdp->nocb_lock --> rcu_node_0 --> &rq->__lock
> >
> > So no kfree*() API can be used in do_set_cpus_allowed(). To prevent
> > memory leakage, the unused user provided affinity mask is now saved in a
> > lockless list to be reused later by subsequent sched_setaffinity() calls.
> >
> > Without kfree_rcu(), the internal cpumask_rcuhead union can be removed
> > too as a lockless list entry only holds a single pointer.
> >
> > Fixes: 851a723e45d1 ("sched: Always clear user_cpus_ptr in do_set_cpus_allowed()")
>
> Bah, or we fix RCU... Paul, how insane is the below?
Makes sense. We can't remove &rdp->nocb_lock --> rcu_node_0 but we can (and
should) indeed remove rcu_node_0 --> &rq->__lock
Just a detail below:
> @@ -2284,10 +2289,13 @@ static void force_qs_rnp(int (*f)(struct rcu_data *rdp))
> }
> for_each_leaf_node_cpu_mask(rnp, cpu, rnp->qsmask) {
> rdp = per_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data, cpu);
> - if (f(rdp)) {
> + ret = f(rdp);
> + if (ret > 0) {
> mask |= rdp->grpmask;
> rcu_disable_urgency_upon_qs(rdp);
> }
> + if (ret < 0)
> + rsmask |= 1UL << (cpu - rnp->grplo);
I guess this can be simplified with rsmask |= rdp->grpmask;
Thanks.
> }
> if (mask != 0) {
> /* Idle/offline CPUs, report (releases rnp->lock). */
> @@ -2296,6 +2304,9 @@ static void force_qs_rnp(int (*f)(struct rcu_data *rdp))
> /* Nothing to do here, so just drop the lock. */
> raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore_rcu_node(rnp, flags);
> }
> +
> + for_each_leaf_node_cpu_mask(rnp, cpu, rsmask)
> + resched_cpu(cpu);
> }
> }
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-31 10:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-31 0:14 [PATCH] sched: Don't call any kfree*() API in do_set_cpus_allowed() Waiman Long
2023-10-31 8:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-31 10:52 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2023-10-31 12:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-31 14:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-10-31 20:02 ` [PATCH] rcu: Break rcu_node_0 --> &rq->__lock order Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-31 21:49 ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-11-01 0:07 ` Waiman Long
2023-11-01 11:21 ` Z qiang
2023-11-01 14:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-11-01 16:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=ZUDcdlrvCEPpQWUe@lothringen \
--to=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=aubrey.li@linux.intel.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=oliver.sang@intel.com \
--cc=pauld@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com \
--cc=quic_neeraju@quicinc.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=yu.c.chen@intel.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