linux-stable.git/kernel/sched/core.c, branch v4.14.78

sched/smt: Update sched_smt_present at runtime

2018-08-15T16:12:51+00:00

commit ba2591a5993eabcc8e874e30f361d8ffbb10d6d4 upstream

The static key sched_smt_present is only updated at boot time when SMT
siblings have been detected. Booting with maxcpus=1 and bringing the
siblings online after boot rebuilds the scheduling domains correctly but
does not update the static key, so the SMT code is not enabled.

Let the key be updated in the scheduler CPU hotplug code to fix this.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra 
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner 
Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk 
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

sched/core: Require cpu_active() in select_task_rq(), for user tasks

2018-07-08T13:30:53+00:00

[ Upstream commit 7af443ee1697607541c6346c87385adab2214743 ]

select_task_rq() is used in a few paths to select the CPU upon which a
thread should be run - for example it is used by try_to_wake_up() & by
fork or exec balancing. As-is it allows use of any online CPU that is
present in the task's cpus_allowed mask.

This presents a problem because there is a period whilst CPUs are
brought online where a CPU is marked online, but is not yet fully
initialized - ie. the period where CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_IDLE <= state <
CPUHP_ONLINE. Usually we don't run any user tasks during this window,
but there are corner cases where this can happen. An example observed
is:

  - Some user task A, running on CPU X, forks to create task B.

  - sched_fork() calls __set_task_cpu() with cpu=X, setting task B's
    task_struct::cpu field to X.

  - CPU X is offlined.

  - Task A, currently somewhere between the __set_task_cpu() in
    copy_process() and the call to wake_up_new_task(), is migrated to
    CPU Y by migrate_tasks() when CPU X is offlined.

  - CPU X is onlined, but still in the CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_IDLE state. The
    scheduler is now active on CPU X, but there are no user tasks on
    the runqueue.

  - Task A runs on CPU Y & reaches wake_up_new_task(). This calls
    select_task_rq() with cpu=X, taken from task B's task_struct,
    and select_task_rq() allows CPU X to be returned.

  - Task A enqueues task B on CPU X's runqueue, via activate_task() &
    enqueue_task().

  - CPU X now has a user task on its runqueue before it has reached the
    CPUHP_ONLINE state.

In most cases, the user tasks that schedule on the newly onlined CPU
have no idea that anything went wrong, but one case observed to be
problematic is if the task goes on to invoke the sched_setaffinity
syscall. The newly onlined CPU reaches the CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_IDLE state
before the CPU that brought it online calls stop_machine_unpark(). This
means that for a portion of the window of time between
CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_IDLE & CPUHP_ONLINE the newly onlined CPU's struct
cpu_stopper has its enabled field set to false. If a user thread is
executed on the CPU during this window and it invokes sched_setaffinity
with a CPU mask that does not include the CPU it's running on, then when
__set_cpus_allowed_ptr() calls stop_one_cpu() intending to invoke
migration_cpu_stop() and perform the actual migration away from the CPU
it will simply return -ENOENT rather than calling migration_cpu_stop().
We then return from the sched_setaffinity syscall back to the user task
that is now running on a CPU which it just asked not to run on, and
which is not present in its cpus_allowed mask.

This patch resolves the problem by having select_task_rq() enforce that
user tasks run on CPUs that are active - the same requirement that
select_fallback_rq() already enforces. This should ensure that newly
onlined CPUs reach the CPUHP_AP_ACTIVE state before being able to
schedule user tasks, and also implies that bringup_wait_for_ap() will
have called stop_machine_unpark() which resolves the sched_setaffinity
issue above.

I haven't yet investigated them, but it may be of interest to review
whether any of the actions performed by hotplug states between
CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_IDLE & CPUHP_AP_ACTIVE could have similar unintended
effects on user tasks that might schedule before they are reached, which
might widen the scope of the problem from just affecting the behaviour
of sched_setaffinity.

Signed-off-by: Paul Burton 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Cc: Linus Torvalds 
Cc: Peter Zijlstra 
Cc: Thomas Gleixner 
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180526154648.11635-2-paul.burton@mips.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

sched/core: Fix rules for running on online && !active CPUs

2018-07-08T13:30:53+00:00

[ Upstream commit 175f0e25abeaa2218d431141ce19cf1de70fa82d ]

As already enforced by the WARN() in __set_cpus_allowed_ptr(), the rules
for running on an online && !active CPU are stricter than just being a
kthread, you need to be a per-cpu kthread.

If you're not strictly per-CPU, you have better CPUs to run on and
don't need the partially booted one to get your work done.

The exception is to allow smpboot threads to bootstrap the CPU itself
and get kernel 'services' initialized before we allow userspace on it.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Cc: Linus Torvalds 
Cc: Paul E. McKenney 
Cc: Peter Zijlstra 
Cc: Steven Rostedt 
Cc: Tejun Heo 
Cc: Thomas Gleixner 
Fixes: 955dbdf4ce87 ("sched: Allow migrating kthreads into online but inactive CPUs")
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170725165821.cejhb7v2s3kecems@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

sched/core: Introduce set_special_state()

2018-06-20T19:02:54+00:00

[ Upstream commit b5bf9a90bbebffba888c9144c5a8a10317b04064 ]

Gaurav reported a perceived problem with TASK_PARKED, which turned out
to be a broken wait-loop pattern in __kthread_parkme(), but the
reported issue can (and does) in fact happen for states that do not do
condition based sleeps.

When the 'current->state = TASK_RUNNING' store of a previous
(concurrent) try_to_wake_up() collides with the setting of a 'special'
sleep state, we can loose the sleep state.

Normal condition based wait-loops are immune to this problem, but for
sleep states that are not condition based are subject to this problem.

There already is a fix for TASK_DEAD. Abstract that and also apply it
to TASK_STOPPED and TASK_TRACED, both of which are also without
condition based wait-loop.

Reported-by: Gaurav Kohli 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Reviewed-by: Oleg Nesterov 
Cc: Linus Torvalds 
Cc: Peter Zijlstra 
Cc: Thomas Gleixner 
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

sched: Stop resched_cpu() from sending IPIs to offline CPUs

2018-03-19T07:42:49+00:00

[ Upstream commit a0982dfa03efca6c239c52cabebcea4afb93ea6b ]

The rcutorture test suite occasionally provokes a splat due to invoking
resched_cpu() on an offline CPU:

WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 8 at /home/paulmck/public_git/linux-rcu/arch/x86/kernel/smp.c:128 native_smp_send_reschedule+0x37/0x40
Modules linked in:
CPU: 2 PID: 8 Comm: rcu_preempt Not tainted 4.14.0-rc4+ #1
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS Ubuntu-1.8.2-1ubuntu1 04/01/2014
task: ffff902ede9daf00 task.stack: ffff96c50010c000
RIP: 0010:native_smp_send_reschedule+0x37/0x40
RSP: 0018:ffff96c50010fdb8 EFLAGS: 00010096
RAX: 000000000000002e RBX: ffff902edaab4680 RCX: 0000000000000003
RDX: 0000000080000003 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 00000000ffffffff
RBP: ffff96c50010fdb8 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000001
R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 00000000299f36ae R12: 0000000000000001
R13: ffffffff9de64240 R14: 0000000000000001 R15: ffffffff9de64240
FS:  0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff902edfc80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
CR2: 00000000f7d4c642 CR3: 000000001e0e2000 CR4: 00000000000006e0
Call Trace:
 resched_curr+0x8f/0x1c0
 resched_cpu+0x2c/0x40
 rcu_implicit_dynticks_qs+0x152/0x220
 force_qs_rnp+0x147/0x1d0
 ? sync_rcu_exp_select_cpus+0x450/0x450
 rcu_gp_kthread+0x5a9/0x950
 kthread+0x142/0x180
 ? force_qs_rnp+0x1d0/0x1d0
 ? kthread_create_on_node+0x40/0x40
 ret_from_fork+0x27/0x40
Code: 14 01 0f 92 c0 84 c0 74 14 48 8b 05 14 4f f4 00 be fd 00 00 00 ff 90 a0 00 00 00 5d c3 89 fe 48 c7 c7 38 89 ca 9d e8 e5 56 08 00 <0f> ff 5d c3 0f 1f 44 00 00 8b 05 52 9e 37 02 85 c0 75 38 55 48
---[ end trace 26df9e5df4bba4ac ]---

This splat cannot be generated by expedited grace periods because they
always invoke resched_cpu() on the current CPU, which is good because
expedited grace periods require that resched_cpu() unconditionally
succeed.  However, other parts of RCU can tolerate resched_cpu() acting
as a no-op, at least as long as it doesn't happen too often.

This commit therefore makes resched_cpu() invoke resched_curr() only if
the CPU is either online or is the current CPU.

Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney 
Cc: Ingo Molnar 
Cc: Peter Zijlstra 

Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

delayacct: Account blkio completion on the correct task

2018-01-23T18:58:13+00:00

commit c96f5471ce7d2aefd0dda560cc23f08ab00bc65d upstream.

Before commit:

  e33a9bba85a8 ("sched/core: move IO scheduling accounting from io_schedule_timeout() into scheduler")

delayacct_blkio_end() was called after context-switching into the task which
completed I/O.

This resulted in double counting: the task would account a delay both waiting
for I/O and for time spent in the runqueue.

With e33a9bba85a8, delayacct_blkio_end() is called by try_to_wake_up().
In ttwu, we have not yet context-switched. This is more correct, in that
the delay accounting ends when the I/O is complete.

But delayacct_blkio_end() relies on 'get_current()', and we have not yet
context-switched into the task whose I/O completed. This results in the
wrong task having its delay accounting statistics updated.

Instead of doing that, pass the task_struct being woken to delayacct_blkio_end(),
so that it can update the statistics of the correct task.

Signed-off-by: Josh Snyder 
Acked-by: Tejun Heo 
Acked-by: Balbir Singh 
Cc: Brendan Gregg 
Cc: Jens Axboe 
Cc: Linus Torvalds 
Cc: Peter Zijlstra 
Cc: Thomas Gleixner 
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Fixes: e33a9bba85a8 ("sched/core: move IO scheduling accounting from io_schedule_timeout() into scheduler")
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1513613712-571-1-git-send-email-joshs@netflix.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

sched: Make resched_cpu() unconditional

2017-11-30T08:40:39+00:00

commit 7c2102e56a3f7d85b5d8f33efbd7aecc1f36fdd8 upstream.

The current implementation of synchronize_sched_expedited() incorrectly
assumes that resched_cpu() is unconditional, which it is not.  This means
that synchronize_sched_expedited() can hang when resched_cpu()'s trylock
fails as follows (analysis by Neeraj Upadhyay):

o	CPU1 is waiting for expedited wait to complete:

	sync_rcu_exp_select_cpus
	     rdp->exp_dynticks_snap & 0x1   // returns 1 for CPU5
	     IPI sent to CPU5

	synchronize_sched_expedited_wait
		 ret = swait_event_timeout(rsp->expedited_wq,
					   sync_rcu_preempt_exp_done(rnp_root),
					   jiffies_stall);

	expmask = 0x20, CPU 5 in idle path (in cpuidle_enter())

o	CPU5 handles IPI and fails to acquire rq lock.

	Handles IPI
	     sync_sched_exp_handler
		 resched_cpu
		     returns while failing to try lock acquire rq->lock
		 need_resched is not set

o	CPU5 calls  rcu_idle_enter() and as need_resched is not set, goes to
	idle (schedule() is not called).

o	CPU 1 reports RCU stall.

Given that resched_cpu() is now used only by RCU, this commit fixes the
assumption by making resched_cpu() unconditional.

Reported-by: Neeraj Upadhyay 
Suggested-by: Neeraj Upadhyay 
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney 
Acked-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) 
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

sched/debug: Ignore TASK_IDLE for SysRq-W

2017-09-29T09:02:57+00:00

Markus reported that tasks in TASK_IDLE state are reported by SysRq-W,
which results in undesirable clutter.

Reported-by: Markus Trippelsdorf 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Cc: Linus Torvalds 
Cc: Peter Zijlstra 
Cc: Thomas Gleixner 
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar

sched/core: WARN() when migrating to an offline CPU

2017-09-12T15:41:04+00:00

Migrating tasks to offline CPUs is a pretty big fail, warn about it.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Cc: Linus Torvalds 
Cc: Peter Zijlstra 
Cc: Thomas Gleixner 
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170907150614.094206976@infradead.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar

sched/cpuset/pm: Fix cpuset vs. suspend-resume bugs

2017-09-07T09:45:21+00:00

Cpusets vs. suspend-resume is _completely_ broken. And it got noticed
because it now resulted in non-cpuset usage breaking too.

On suspend cpuset_cpu_inactive() doesn't call into
cpuset_update_active_cpus() because it doesn't want to move tasks about,
there is no need, all tasks are frozen and won't run again until after
we've resumed everything.

But this means that when we finally do call into
cpuset_update_active_cpus() after resuming the last frozen cpu in
cpuset_cpu_active(), the top_cpuset will not have any difference with
the cpu_active_mask and this it will not in fact do _anything_.

So the cpuset configuration will not be restored. This was largely
hidden because we would unconditionally create identity domains and
mobile users would not in fact use cpusets much. And servers what do use
cpusets tend to not suspend-resume much.

An addition problem is that we'd not in fact wait for the cpuset work to
finish before resuming the tasks, allowing spurious migrations outside
of the specified domains.

Fix the rebuild by introducing cpuset_force_rebuild() and fix the
ordering with cpuset_wait_for_hotplug().

Reported-by: Andy Lutomirski 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Cc: 
Cc: Andy Lutomirski 
Cc: Linus Torvalds 
Cc: Mike Galbraith 
Cc: Peter Zijlstra 
Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki 
Cc: Tejun Heo 
Cc: Thomas Gleixner 
Fixes: deb7aa308ea2 ("cpuset: reorganize CPU / memory hotplug handling")
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170907091338.orwxrqkbfkki3c24@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar