From: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: tglx@linutronix.de, bigeasy@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: FAILED: patch "[PATCH] sched: Prevent balance_push() on remote runqueues" failed to apply to 5.13-stable tree
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 16:13:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1631715213238253@kroah.com> (raw)
The patch below does not apply to the 5.13-stable tree.
If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
id to <stable@vger.kernel.org>.
thanks,
greg k-h
------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------
From 868ad33bfa3bf39960982682ad3a0f8ebda1656e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2021 15:55:52 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] sched: Prevent balance_push() on remote runqueues
sched_setscheduler() and rt_mutex_setprio() invoke the run-queue balance
callback after changing priorities or the scheduling class of a task. The
run-queue for which the callback is invoked can be local or remote.
That's not a problem for the regular rq::push_work which is serialized with
a busy flag in the run-queue struct, but for the balance_push() work which
is only valid to be invoked on the outgoing CPU that's wrong. It not only
triggers the debug warning, but also leaves the per CPU variable push_work
unprotected, which can result in double enqueues on the stop machine list.
Remove the warning and validate that the function is invoked on the
outgoing CPU.
Fixes: ae7927023243 ("sched: Optimize finish_lock_switch()")
Reported-by: Sebastian Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/87zgt1hdw7.ffs@tglx
diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index f3b27c6c5153..b21a1857b75a 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -8523,7 +8523,6 @@ static void balance_push(struct rq *rq)
struct task_struct *push_task = rq->curr;
lockdep_assert_rq_held(rq);
- SCHED_WARN_ON(rq->cpu != smp_processor_id());
/*
* Ensure the thing is persistent until balance_push_set(.on = false);
@@ -8531,9 +8530,10 @@ static void balance_push(struct rq *rq)
rq->balance_callback = &balance_push_callback;
/*
- * Only active while going offline.
+ * Only active while going offline and when invoked on the outgoing
+ * CPU.
*/
- if (!cpu_dying(rq->cpu))
+ if (!cpu_dying(rq->cpu) || rq != this_rq())
return;
/*
reply other threads:[~2021-09-15 14:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=1631715213238253@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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