From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>,
Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] cpuset: fix cpuset_cpus_allowed_fallback() don't update tsk->rt.nr_cpus_allowed
Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 14:48:15 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DCCC61F.80408@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1305129929.2914.247.camel@laptop>
Hi
> On Mon, 2011-05-02 at 19:55 +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
>> The rule is, we have to update tsk->rt.nr_cpus_allowed too if we change
>> tsk->cpus_allowed. Otherwise RT scheduler may confuse.
>>
>> This patch fixes it.
>>
>> btw, system_state checking is very important. current boot sequence is (1) smp_init
>> (ie secondary cpus up and created cpu bound kthreads). (2) sched_init_smp().
>> Then following bad scenario can be happen,
>>
>> (1) cpuup call notifier(CPU_UP_PREPARE)
>> (2) A cpu notifier consumer create FIFO kthread
>> (3) It call kthread_bind()
>> ... but, now secondary cpu haven't ONLINE
>
> isn't
thanks, correction.
>
>> (3) schedule() makes fallback and cpuset_cpus_allowed_fallback
>> change task->cpus_allowed
>
> I'm failing to see how this is happening, surely that kthread isn't
> actually running that early?
If my understand correctly, current call graph is below.
kernel_init()
smp_init();
cpu_up()
... cpu hotplug notification
kthread_create()
sched_init_smp();
So, cpu hotplug event is happen before sched_init_smp(). The old rule is,
all kthreads of using cpu-up notification have to use kthread_bind(). It
protected from sched load balance.
but, now cpuset_cpus_allowed_fallback() forcedly change kthread's cpumask.
Why is this works? the point are two.
- rcu_cpu_kthread_should_stop() call set_cpus_allowed_ptr() again periodically.
then, it can reset cpumask if cpuset_cpus_allowed_fallback() change it.
my debug print obseve following cpumask change occur at boot time.
1) kthread_bind: bind cpu1
2) cpuset_cpus_allowed_fallback: bind possible cpu
3) rcu_cpu_kthread_should_stop: rebind cpu1
- while tsk->rt.nr_cpus_allowed == 1, sched load balancer never be crash.
>
>> (4) find_lowest_rq() touch local_cpu_mask if task->rt.nr_cpus_allowed != 1,
>> but it haven't been initialized.
>>
>> RCU folks plan to introduce such FIFO kthread and our testing hitted the
>> above issue. Then this patch also protect it.
>
> I'm fairly sure it doesn't, normal cpu-hotplug doesn't poke at
> system_state.
If my understand correctly. it's pure scheduler issue. because
- rcuc keep the old rule (ie an early spawned kthread have to call kthread_bind)
- cpuset_cpus_allowed_fallback() is called from scheduler internal
- crash is happen in find_lowest_rq(). (following line)
static int find_lowest_rq(struct task_struct *task)
{
(snip)
if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, lowest_mask)) // HERE
IOW, I think cpuset_cpus_allowed_fallback() should NOT be changed
tsk->cpus_allowed until to finish sched_init_smp().
Do you have an any alternative idea for this?
>> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro<kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
>> Cc: Oleg Nesterov<oleg@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Peter Zijlstra<a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
>> Cc: Ingo Molnar<mingo@elte.hu>
>> ---
>> include/linux/cpuset.h | 1 +
>> kernel/cpuset.c | 1 +
>> kernel/sched.c | 4 ++++
>> 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/cpuset.h b/include/linux/cpuset.h
>> index f20eb8f..42dcbdc 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/cpuset.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/cpuset.h
>> @@ -147,6 +147,7 @@ static inline void cpuset_cpus_allowed(struct task_struct *p,
>> static inline int cpuset_cpus_allowed_fallback(struct task_struct *p)
>> {
>> cpumask_copy(&p->cpus_allowed, cpu_possible_mask);
>> + p->rt.nr_cpus_allowed = cpumask_weight(&p->cpus_allowed);
>> return cpumask_any(cpu_active_mask);
>> }
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/cpuset.c b/kernel/cpuset.c
>> index 1ceeb04..6e5bbe8 100644
>> --- a/kernel/cpuset.c
>> +++ b/kernel/cpuset.c
>> @@ -2220,6 +2220,7 @@ int cpuset_cpus_allowed_fallback(struct task_struct *tsk)
>> cpumask_copy(&tsk->cpus_allowed, cpu_possible_mask);
>> cpu = cpumask_any(cpu_active_mask);
>> }
>> + tsk->rt.nr_cpus_allowed = cpumask_weight(&tsk->cpus_allowed);
>>
>> return cpu;
>> }
>
> I don't really see the point of doing this separately from your second
> patch, please fold them.
Ok. Will do.
>
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
>> index fd4625f..bfcd219 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched.c
>> @@ -2352,6 +2352,10 @@ static int select_fallback_rq(int cpu, struct task_struct *p)
>> if (dest_cpu< nr_cpu_ids)
>> return dest_cpu;
>>
>> + /* Don't worry. It's temporary mismatch. */
>> + if (system_state< SYSTEM_RUNNING)
>> + return cpu;
>> +
>> /* No more Mr. Nice Guy. */
>> dest_cpu = cpuset_cpus_allowed_fallback(p);
>> /*
>
> Like explained, I don't believe this actually fixes your problem (its
> also disgusting).
If anybody have an alternative idea, I have no reason to refuse it.
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-13 5:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-28 14:20 [RFC PATCH] " KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-28 16:11 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-05-02 10:42 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-02 10:55 ` [PATCH 1/2] " KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-11 16:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-13 5:48 ` KOSAKI Motohiro [this message]
2011-05-13 6:42 ` Yong Zhang
2011-05-13 7:33 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-13 7:43 ` Yong Zhang
2011-05-13 9:34 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-13 17:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-14 11:17 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-16 13:37 ` Yong Zhang
2011-05-19 8:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-19 8:54 ` Yong Zhang
2011-05-15 18:55 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-05-16 13:26 ` Yong Zhang
2011-05-19 6:06 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] rcu: don't bind offline cpu KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-19 6:08 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] cpuset: fix cpuset_cpus_allowed_fallback() don't update tsk->rt.nr_cpus_allowed KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-28 16:35 ` [tip:sched/urgent] cpuset: Fix cpuset_cpus_allowed_fallback(), " tip-bot for KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-06-20 10:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-06-21 9:54 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-19 8:34 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] rcu: don't bind offline cpu Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-19 8:50 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-19 9:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-19 10:12 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-19 11:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-20 22:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-05-19 8:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-02 10:56 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched, cpuset: introduce do_set_cpus_allowed() helper function KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-02 12:58 ` [RFC PATCH] cpuset: fix cpuset_cpus_allowed_fallback() don't update tsk->rt.nr_cpus_allowed 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=4DCCC61F.80408@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=miaox@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@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
Powered by JetHome