mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Mathieu Desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
	"Dietmar Eggemann" <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	"Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	"Ben Segall" <bsegall@google.com>, "Mel Gorman" <mgorman@suse.de>,
	"Valentin Schneider" <vschneid@redhat.com>,
	"K Prateek Nayak" <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
	"Luca Abeni" <luca.abeni@santannapisa.it>,
	"Mathieu Poirier" <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
	"Waiman Long" <longman@redhat.com>,
	"Ridong Chen" <ridong.chen@linux.dev>,
	"Tejun Heo" <tj@kernel.org>,
	"Johannes Weiner" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	"Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>,
	"Shuah Khan" <shuah@kernel.org>,
	"Sebastian Andrzej Siewior" <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
	"Clark Williams" <clrkwllms@kernel.org>,
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev
Subject: [PATCH v2 07/21] sched/deadline: Do not release a departing sleeper's bandwidth twice
Date: Wed,  4 Nov 2026 16:11:53 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261104211207.1392343-8-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261104211207.1392343-1-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>

Commit 41a7968022ca ("sched/deadline: Fix total_bw leak when switching
away from SCHED_DEADLINE while !queued") releases the bandwidth of a
task that leaves SCHED_DEADLINE asleep with no inactive timer pending.
Three cases release what the root domain no longer holds, or never held:

 - the task keeps its parameters. inactive_task_timer() resets them
   once it has released the bandwidth (__dl_clear_params()); left in
   place, task_contending() and task_non_contending() take the task,
   now of another policy, for one with bandwidth when priority
   inheritance boosts it into the deadline class, and a deboost while
   it sleeps releases that bandwidth from total_bw a second time. The
   root domain then admits deadline tasks beyond its capacity;
 - a task deboosted from priority inheritance with no parameters of its
   own, and a special one (SCHED_FLAG_SUGOV), have no bandwidth in
   total_bw. Releasing 0 changes nothing, and the root domain that
   dl_task_root_domain_cpu() finds from the task's mask means nothing
   either: a sleeping task of another policy may have no active CPU in
   its mask, a CPU it is pinned to having gone offline, until its next
   wakeup widens it;
 - migrate_task_rq_dl() clears dl_non_contending when it cannot cancel
   the inactive timer because its handler runs. That handler, once it
   takes the task's locks, finds it out of SCHED_DEADLINE and releases
   total_bw itself.

Release for a task with parameters of its own, not special, and clear
its bandwidth afterwards, once sub_rq_bw(), which reads it, is done:
every path that would release it again then takes a dl_bw of 0, and a
handler that runs late finds nothing to release. A test of
hrtimer_active() would not tell that handler apart: it stays true after
the handler returns, until the hrtimer code clears its running state,
and the bandwidth of a task switched out meanwhile would never be
released.

The parameters themselves stay, where inactive_task_timer() resets them
along with the bandwidth, because the task may still be the donor of a
priority inheritance boost: rt_mutex_adjust_pi() walks the chain and
deboosts the owner after the runqueue lock of the policy change is
dropped, and until it does, a replenishment of that owner, which
update_curr_dl_se() does at once for a boosted entity, would run
replenish_dl_entity() on a donor whose dl_runtime and dl_period are 0.
It would warn and then never leave

	while (dl_se->runtime <= 0) {
		dl_se->deadline += pi_of(dl_se)->dl_period;
		dl_se->runtime += pi_of(dl_se)->dl_runtime;
	}

with the runqueue lock held and interrupts off. __setparam_dl() sets
the parameters anew if the task comes back, and inactive_task_timer()
resets them at its 0-lag time if it does not.

The deadline_bw_test selftest, added later in this series, reproduces
the first case as pi_former_owner_asleep: in a one-CPU partition with
room, the waiter of its second round is refused as a deadline task,
total_bw having wrapped. The other two were found by reading.

The donor window was found by the Sashiko AI review of the first posting
of this series, and shown with a kernel carrying mdelay(20) before
rt_mutex_adjust_pi() to widen it: a deadline task blocks on a
PTHREAD_PRIO_INHERIT mutex with its runtime unspent, and is switched to
SCHED_OTHER while the owner it boosts spins. Clearing the parameters
there, that kernel warns in replenish_dl_entity() and stops, on round 4
and round 3 of two 8-CPU VMs; clearing the bandwidth alone, both go
through their eight rounds.

Fixes: 41a7968022ca ("sched/deadline: Fix total_bw leak when switching away from SCHED_DEADLINE while !queued")
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
---
 kernel/sched/deadline.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
index b646063a7b0d..624cabdec965 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
@@ -3573,6 +3573,8 @@ static void switched_from_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
 	dec_dl_tasks_cs(p);
 
 	if (!task_on_rq_queued(p)) {
+		bool released = false;
+
 		if (p->dl.dl_non_contending) {
 			/*
 			 * Inactive timer is armed. However, p is leaving
@@ -3585,12 +3587,18 @@ static void switched_from_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
 			 * release total_bw via __dl_sub().
 			 */
 			sub_running_bw(&p->dl, &rq->dl);
-		} else {
+		} else if (p->dl.dl_runtime && !dl_entity_is_special(&p->dl)) {
 			/*
 			 * No pending inactive timer: the task never ran as
 			 * DEADLINE or the timer already fired while still
 			 * DEADLINE (only dropping running_bw at that time).
 			 * Nobody else will release total_bw, do it now.
+			 *
+			 * Not for a task without parameters of its own, one
+			 * deboosted from priority inheritance, whose mask may
+			 * have no active CPU for dl_task_root_domain_cpu(),
+			 * nor for a special one: neither has bandwidth in
+			 * total_bw.
 			 */
 			unsigned int cpu = dl_task_root_domain_cpu(p);
 			struct dl_bw *dl_b = &cpu_rq(cpu)->rd->dl_bw;
@@ -3598,8 +3606,29 @@ static void switched_from_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
 			raw_spin_lock(&dl_b->lock);
 			__dl_sub(dl_b, p->dl.dl_bw, dl_bw_cpus(cpu));
 			raw_spin_unlock(&dl_b->lock);
+			released = true;
 		}
 		sub_rq_bw(&p->dl, &rq->dl);
+		/*
+		 * Released: its bandwidth is no one's to release again, and
+		 * a dl_bw of 0 is what every path that would takes. Kept, it
+		 * would make the task one with bandwidth to task_contending()
+		 * and task_non_contending() once priority inheritance boosts
+		 * it, and a deboost while it sleeps would release it a second
+		 * time. So would the inactive timer's handler when it runs
+		 * late, dl_non_contending cleared under it by
+		 * migrate_task_rq_dl(): it finds !dl_task(p).
+		 *
+		 * The parameters themselves stay, where
+		 * inactive_task_timer() resets them with the bandwidth: the
+		 * task may still be the donor of a priority inheritance
+		 * boost until rt_mutex_adjust_pi() walks the chain, outside
+		 * this runqueue lock, and replenish_dl_entity() of the
+		 * boosted owner would never leave its loop over a dl_period
+		 * and a dl_runtime of 0.
+		 */
+		if (released)
+			p->dl.dl_bw = 0;
 	}
 
 	/*
-- 
2.47.3


  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-11-04 21:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-11-04 21:11 [PATCH v2 00/21] sched/deadline: bandwidth accounting fixes and selftests Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-04 21:11 ` [PATCH v2 01/21] sched: Reject SCHED_FLAG_KEEP_PARAMS before reserving deadline bandwidth Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-04 21:11 ` [PATCH v2 02/21] sched: Refuse SCHED_FLAG_KEEP_PARAMS that would change the policy Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-04 21:11 ` [PATCH v2 03/21] sched/deadline: Do not admit bandwidth for parameters that are kept Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-04 21:11 ` [PATCH v2 04/21] sched/deadline: Do not divide by zero active CPUs of a root domain Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-04 21:46   ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-04 21:11 ` [PATCH v2 05/21] sched/deadline: Do not BUG() on a deadline task with no active CPU allowed Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-04 21:11 ` [PATCH v2 06/21] sched/deadline: Do not lose a throttled task switched out and back Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-04 22:09   ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-04 21:11 ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2026-11-04 22:15   ` [PATCH v2 07/21] sched/deadline: Do not release a departing sleeper's bandwidth twice sashiko-bot
2026-11-04 21:11 ` [PATCH v2 08/21] selftests/sched: Add a test of SCHED_DEADLINE policy round trips Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-04 21:11 ` [PATCH v2 09/21] sched/deadline: Keep departing bandwidth across a root domain rebuild Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-04 22:44   ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-04 21:11 ` [PATCH v2 10/21] selftests/sched: Test SCHED_DEADLINE " Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-04 21:11 ` [PATCH v2 11/21] sched/deadline: Do not take a waking task's bandwidth off a runqueue it left Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-04 21:11 ` [PATCH v2 12/21] sched/debug: Show the deadline bandwidth of each runqueue Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-04 21:11 ` [PATCH v2 13/21] sched/deadline: Rebuild the root domains' accounting without cpusets too Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-04 23:18   ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-04 21:12 ` [PATCH v2 14/21] selftests/sched: Add a test of SCHED_DEADLINE bandwidth accounting Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-04 21:12 ` [PATCH v2 15/21] sched/deadline: Record the root domain holding a task's bandwidth Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-04 23:31   ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-04 21:12 ` [PATCH v2 16/21] sched/deadline: Move a task's bandwidth only where room was made Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-04 21:12 ` [PATCH v2 17/21] cgroup/cpuset: Give back the bandwidth an attach did not move Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-04 23:56   ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-04 21:12 ` [PATCH v2 18/21] sched/deadline: Credit a rebuild to a CPU that can hold the bandwidth Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-05  0:18   ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-04 21:12 ` [PATCH v2 19/21] sched: Clear cpuset_locked where the policy check retries Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-04 21:12 ` [PATCH v2 20/21] sched/deadline: Cancel the replenishment timer with the parameters Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-05  0:25   ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-04 21:12 ` [PATCH v2 21/21] sched/deadline: Count the bandwidth a boosted task is given Mathieu Desnoyers
2026-11-05  0:36   ` sashiko-bot

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=20261104211207.1392343-8-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --to=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=clrkwllms@kernel.org \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=luca.abeni@santannapisa.it \
    --cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=ridong.chen@linux.dev \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®