From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: "Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>, "Tejun Heo" <tj@kernel.org>,
"David Vernet" <void@manifault.com>,
"Changwoo Min" <changwoo@igalia.com>,
"Ridong Chen" <ridong.chen@linux.dev>,
"Johannes Weiner" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
sched-ext@lists.linux.dev, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: Protect is_in_v2_mode() in cpuset_num_cpus()
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2026 14:10:40 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b8f66cbe-bb1e-4148-b2e2-55bd95f1c8d1@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <arv2-3-6-Ewv0gpb@gpd4>
On 9/29/26 1:35 PM, Andrea Righi wrote:
> Hi Michal and Waiman,
>
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 11:32:33AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> On 9/29/26 9:47 AM, Michal Koutný wrote:
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 10:37:38AM +0200, Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com> wrote:
>>>> cpuset_num_cpus() enters its RCU read-side section only after checking
>>>> is_in_v2_mode(). When cpuset is bound to a v1 hierarchy, is_in_v2_mode()
>>>> dereferences cpuset_cgrp_subsys.root, which is freed via kfree_rcu()
>>>> once that hierarchy is destroyed and cpuset is rebound to the default
>>>> hierarchy. A preemptible caller outside RCU can therefore read the flags
>>>> of a freed root.
>>>>
>>>> The only current caller, fair's group share calculation, runs under the
>>>> rq lock with preemption disabled, so it can't hit this. However, the
>>>> helper already means to protect itself with RCU, and upcoming sched_ext
>>>> support exposes it to sleepable BPF programs.
>>>>
>>>> Take the RCU read lock before is_in_v2_mode() so that the whole lookup
>>>> is protected regardless of the caller's context.
>>> This feels like mere querying of the mode shouldn't require such
>>> constraints (despite it's needed anyway later down). But it could truly
>>> happen with the novel usage (CONFIG_CPUSET_V1 && unmounting cpuset
>>> hierarchy for some reason, I wonder how you noticed :)).
>>>
>>> Then I'd welcome more structured approach with at least:
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/cgroup-defs.h b/include/linux/cgroup-defs.h
>>> index 3754d697854b3..7f4d346cfb119 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/cgroup-defs.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/cgroup-defs.h
>>> @@ -841,7 +841,7 @@ struct cgroup_subsys {
>>> const char *legacy_name;
>>>
>>> /* link to parent, protected by cgroup_lock() */
>>> - struct cgroup_root *root;
>>> + struct cgroup_root __rcu *root;
>>>
>>> /* idr for css->id */
>>> struct idr css_idr;
>>> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c b/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c
>>> index 227d09704ca59..a718b5f521fb2 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c
>>> @@ -1909,7 +1909,7 @@ int rebind_subsystems(struct cgroup_root *dst_root, u32 ss_mask)
>>> /* rebind */
>>> RCU_INIT_POINTER(scgrp->subsys[ssid], NULL);
>>> rcu_assign_pointer(dcgrp->subsys[ssid], css);
>>> - ss->root = dst_root;
>>> + rcu_assign_pointer(ss->root, dst_root);
>>>
>>> spin_lock_irq(&css_set_lock);
>>> css->cgroup = dcgrp;
>>>
>>>
>>> However, if I zoom out, I see that the intention of reading cpuset's
>>> nr_cpus from the scheduler is meant for setups where cpuset tree ~ cpu
>>> tree:
>>>
>>> | * This only really works for cgroup-v2 where all the controllers are mounted
>>> | * in the same hierarchy. If not cgroup-v2 or no cpuset controller is
>>> | * configured it reverts to num_online_cpus().
>>>
>>> Hence it may be just OK to do:
>>>
>>> int nr = num_online_cpus();
>>> struct cpuset *cs;
>>>
>>> - if (is_in_v2_mode()) {
>>> + if (cpuset_v2()) {
>>> guard(rcu)();
>>> cs = css_cs(cgroup_e_css(cgrp, &cpuset_cgrp_subsys));
>>> if (cs)
>>>
>>> I hope Waiman seconds this -- if a feature depends on shared tree,
>>> there's only so much that 'cpuset_v2_mode' can guarantee.
>> I think it is simpler to just change is_in_v2_mode() to cpuset_v2(). Almost
>> all the cpuset functions should either take the callback_lock with interrupt
>> disabled (which is a RCU read-side critical section) or with rcu_read_lock()
>> and cpuset_mutex() acquired. This cpuset_num_cpus() function is an
>> exception. Given what is said in the comment, this function is not supposed
>> to be used with v1 mounted. We should change it to cpuset_v2().
> The comment says that, outside cgroup v2, cpuset_num_cpus() falls back to
> num_online_cpus(). However, on v1 with cpu and cpuset mounted together using
> cpuset_v2_mode, it returns the group's effective cpuset count and fair.c uses
> that count in the default "concur" group share calculation and in "max" mode.
>
> So replacing is_in_v2_mode() with cpuset_v2() would change scheduler behavior
> for that setup. I guess we could either preserve the current behavior, fix the
> comment and protect the root lookup with RCU; or make the code follow the
> documented v2-only behavior. Which one would you prefer?
I will let Peter decide if he wants to support the cpuset_v2_mode mount
option of cgroup v1 since he is the original author of
cpuset_num_cpus(). If this is supported, we have to update the function
comment as well.
Cheers,
Longman
>
> Thanks,
> -Andrea
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-29 18:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-29 8:37 [PATCHSET sched_ext/for-7.4] sched_ext: Add scx_bpf_cgroup_nr_cpus() Andrea Righi
2026-09-29 8:37 ` [PATCH 1/3] cgroup/cpuset: Protect is_in_v2_mode() in cpuset_num_cpus() Andrea Righi
2026-09-29 13:47 ` Michal Koutný
2026-09-29 15:32 ` Waiman Long
2026-09-29 17:35 ` Andrea Righi
2026-09-29 18:10 ` Waiman Long [this message]
2026-09-29 19:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-09-29 19:46 ` Waiman Long
2026-09-29 19:57 ` Andrea Righi
2026-09-29 8:37 ` [PATCH 2/3] sched_ext: Introduce scx_bpf_cgroup_nr_cpus() Andrea Righi
2026-09-29 8:37 ` [PATCH 3/3] selftests/sched_ext: Test scx_bpf_cgroup_nr_cpus() Andrea Righi
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=b8f66cbe-bb1e-4148-b2e2-55bd95f1c8d1@redhat.com \
--to=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ridong.chen@linux.dev \
--cc=sched-ext@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=void@manifault.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®