mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@codeaurora.org>,
	stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] sched/rt: Use container_of() to get root domain in rto_push_irq_work_func()
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 20:45:37 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180124015620.675202611@goodmis.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180124014536.348451435@goodmis.org>

[-- Attachment #1: 0001-sched-rt-Use-container_of-to-get-root-domain-in-rto_.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2625 bytes --]

From: "Steven Rostedt (VMware)" <rostedt@goodmis.org>

When the rto_push_irq_work_func() is called, it looks at the RT overloaded
bitmask in the root domain via the runqueue (rq->rd). The problem is that
during CPU up and down, nothing here stops rq->rd from changing between
taking the rq->rd->rto_lock and releasing it. That means the lock that is
released is not the same lock that was taken.

Instead of using this_rq()->rd to get the root domain, as the irq work is
part of the root domain, we can simply get the root domain from the irq work
that is passed to the routine:

 container_of(work, struct root_domain, rto_push_work)

This keeps the root domain consistent.

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAEU1=PkiHO35Dzna8EQqNSKW1fr1y1zRQ5y66X117MG06sQtNA@mail.gmail.com
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Fixes: 4bdced5c9a292 ("sched/rt: Simplify the IPI based RT balancing logic")
Reported-by: Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@codeaurora.org>
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@goodmis.org>
---
 kernel/sched/rt.c | 15 ++++++++-------
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/rt.c b/kernel/sched/rt.c
index 665ace2fc558..274b55e4a560 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/rt.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/rt.c
@@ -1907,9 +1907,8 @@ static void push_rt_tasks(struct rq *rq)
  * the rt_loop_next will cause the iterator to perform another scan.
  *
  */
-static int rto_next_cpu(struct rq *rq)
+static int rto_next_cpu(struct root_domain *rd)
 {
-	struct root_domain *rd = rq->rd;
 	int next;
 	int cpu;
 
@@ -1985,7 +1984,7 @@ static void tell_cpu_to_push(struct rq *rq)
 	 * Otherwise it is finishing up and an ipi needs to be sent.
 	 */
 	if (rq->rd->rto_cpu < 0)
-		cpu = rto_next_cpu(rq);
+		cpu = rto_next_cpu(rq->rd);
 
 	raw_spin_unlock(&rq->rd->rto_lock);
 
@@ -1998,6 +1997,8 @@ static void tell_cpu_to_push(struct rq *rq)
 /* Called from hardirq context */
 void rto_push_irq_work_func(struct irq_work *work)
 {
+	struct root_domain *rd =
+		container_of(work, struct root_domain, rto_push_work);
 	struct rq *rq;
 	int cpu;
 
@@ -2013,18 +2014,18 @@ void rto_push_irq_work_func(struct irq_work *work)
 		raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock);
 	}
 
-	raw_spin_lock(&rq->rd->rto_lock);
+	raw_spin_lock(&rd->rto_lock);
 
 	/* Pass the IPI to the next rt overloaded queue */
-	cpu = rto_next_cpu(rq);
+	cpu = rto_next_cpu(rd);
 
-	raw_spin_unlock(&rq->rd->rto_lock);
+	raw_spin_unlock(&rd->rto_lock);
 
 	if (cpu < 0)
 		return;
 
 	/* Try the next RT overloaded CPU */
-	irq_work_queue_on(&rq->rd->rto_push_work, cpu);
+	irq_work_queue_on(&rd->rto_push_work, cpu);
 }
 #endif /* HAVE_RT_PUSH_IPI */
 
-- 
2.15.1

  reply	other threads:[~2018-01-24  1:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-01-24  1:45 [PATCH 0/2] sched/rt: Fix race with sched IPIs and root domain changes Steven Rostedt
2018-01-24  1:45 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2018-01-24  1:45 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched/rt: Up the root domain ref count when passing it around via IPIs Steven Rostedt

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=20180124015620.675202611@goodmis.org \
    --to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pkondeti@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.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

Powered by JetHome