[ Upstream commit f0498d2a54e7966ce23cd7c7ff42c64fa0059b07 ]

Kuyo reported sporadic failures on a sched_setaffinity() vs CPU
hotplug stress-test -- notably affine_move_task() remains stuck in
wait_for_completion(), leading to a hung-task detector warning.

Specifically, it was reported that stop_one_cpu_nowait(.fn =
migration_cpu_stop) returns false -- this stopper is responsible for
the matching complete().

The race scenario is:

	CPU0					CPU1

					// doing _cpu_down()

  __set_cpus_allowed_ptr()
    task_rq_lock();
					takedown_cpu()
					  stop_machine_cpuslocked(take_cpu_down..)

					<PREEMPT: cpu_stopper_thread()
					  MULTI_STOP_PREPARE
					  ...
    __set_cpus_allowed_ptr_locked()
      affine_move_task()
        task_rq_unlock();

  <PREEMPT: cpu_stopper_thread()\>
    ack_state()
					  MULTI_STOP_RUN
					    take_cpu_down()
					      __cpu_disable();
					      stop_machine_park();
						stopper->enabled = false;
					 />
   />
	stop_one_cpu_nowait(.fn = migration_cpu_stop);
          if (stopper->enabled) // false!!!

That is, by doing stop_one_cpu_nowait() after dropping rq-lock, the
stopper thread gets a chance to preempt and allows the cpu-down for
the target CPU to complete.

OTOH, since stop_one_cpu_nowait() / cpu_stop_queue_work() needs to
issue a wakeup, it must not be ran under the scheduler locks.

Solve this apparent contradiction by keeping preemption disabled over
the unlock + queue_stopper combination:

	preempt_disable();
	task_rq_unlock(...);
	if (!stop_pending)
	  stop_one_cpu_nowait(...)
	preempt_enable();

This respects the lock ordering contraints while still avoiding the
above race. That is, if we find the CPU is online under rq-lock, the
targeted stop_one_cpu_nowait() must succeed.

Apply this pattern to all similar stop_one_cpu_nowait() invocations.

Fixes: 6d337eab041d ("sched: Fix migrate_disable() vs set_cpus_allowed_ptr()")
Reported-by: "Kuyo Chang (張建文)" <Kuyo.Chang@mediatek.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: "Kuyo Chang (張建文)" <Kuyo.Chang@mediatek.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20231010200442.GA16515@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

[ Upstream commit 23c9519def98ee0fa97ea5871535e9b136f522fc ]

find_energy_efficient_cpu() bails out early if effective util of the
task is 0 as the delta at this point will be zero and there's nothing
for EAS to do. When uclamp is being used, this could lead to wrong
decisions when uclamp_max is set to 0. In this case the task is capped
to performance point 0, but it is actually running and consuming energy
and we can benefit from EAS energy calculations.

Rework the condition so that it bails out when both util and uclamp_min
are 0.

We can do that without needing to use uclamp_task_util(); remove it.

Fixes: d81304bc6193 ("sched/uclamp: Cater for uclamp in find_energy_efficient_cpu()'s early exit condition")
Signed-off-by: Qais Yousef (Google) <qyousef@layalina.io>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230916232955.2099394-3-qyousef@layalina.io
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

[ Upstream commit 6b00a40147653c8ea748e8f4396510f252763364 ]

When uclamp_max is being used, the util of the task could be higher than
the spare capacity of the CPU, but due to uclamp_max value we force-fit
it there.

The way the condition for checking for max_spare_cap in
find_energy_efficient_cpu() was constructed; it ignored any CPU that has
its spare_cap less than or _equal_ to max_spare_cap. Since we initialize
max_spare_cap to 0; this lead to never setting max_spare_cap_cpu and
hence ending up never performing compute_energy() for this cluster and
missing an opportunity for a better energy efficient placement to honour
uclamp_max setting.

	max_spare_cap = 0;
	cpu_cap = capacity_of(cpu) - cpu_util(p);  // 0 if cpu_util(p) is high

	...

	util_fits_cpu(...);		// will return true if uclamp_max forces it to fit

	...

	// this logic will fail to update max_spare_cap_cpu if cpu_cap is 0
	if (cpu_cap > max_spare_cap) {
		max_spare_cap = cpu_cap;
		max_spare_cap_cpu = cpu;
	}

prev_spare_cap suffers from a similar problem.

Fix the logic by converting the variables into long and treating -1
value as 'not populated' instead of 0 which is a viable and correct
spare capacity value. We need to be careful signed comparison is used
when comparing with cpu_cap in one of the conditions.

Fixes: 1d42509e475c ("sched/fair: Make EAS wakeup placement consider uclamp restrictions")
Signed-off-by: Qais Yousef (Google) <qyousef@layalina.io>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230916232955.2099394-2-qyousef@layalina.io
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

[ Upstream commit c0490bc9bb62d9376f3dd4ec28e03ca0fef97152 ]

We don't need to maintain per-queue leaf_cfs_rq_list on !SMP, since
it's used for cfs_rq load tracking & balancing on SMP.

But sched debug interface uses it to print per-cfs_rq stats.

This patch fixes the !SMP version of cfs_rq_is_decayed(), so the
per-queue leaf_cfs_rq_list is also maintained correctly on !SMP,
to fix the warning in assert_list_leaf_cfs_rq().

Fixes: 0a00a354644e ("sched/fair: Delete useless condition in tg_unthrottle_up()")
Reported-by: Leo Yu-Chi Liang <ycliang@andestech.com>
Signed-off-by: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@bytedance.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Tested-by: Leo Yu-Chi Liang <ycliang@andestech.com>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZN87UsqkWcFLDxea@swlinux02/
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230913132031.2242151-1-chengming.zhou@linux.dev
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

[ Upstream commit c2e164ac33f75e0acb93004960c73bd9166d3d35 ]

There is no need to use runnable_avg when estimating util_est and that
even generates wrong behavior because one includes blocked tasks whereas
the other one doesn't. This can lead to accounting twice the waking task p,
once with the blocked runnable_avg and another one when adding its
util_est.

cpu's runnable_avg is already used when computing util_avg which is then
compared with util_est.

In some situation, feec will not select prev_cpu but another one on the
same performance domain because of higher max_util

Fixes: 7d0583cf9ec7 ("sched/fair, cpufreq: Introduce 'runnable boosting'")
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Tested-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230706135144.324311-1-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

When checking whether a recently used CPU can be a potential idle
candidate, recent_used_cpu should be used to test p->cpus_ptr as
p->recent_used_cpu is not equal to recent_used_cpu and candidate
decision is made based on recent_used_cpu here.

Fixes: 89aafd67f28c ("sched/fair: Use prev instead of new target as recent_used_cpu")
Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230620080747.359122-1-linmiaohe@huawei.com

After commit 8ad075c2eb1f ("sched: Async unthrottling for cfs
bandwidth"), we may update the rq clock multiple times in the loop of
__cfsb_csd_unthrottle().

A prior (although less common) instance of this problem exists in
unthrottle_offline_cfs_rqs().

Cure both by ensuring update_rq_clock() is called before the loop and
setting RQCF_ACT_SKIP during the loop, to supress further updates.
The alternative would be pulling update_rq_clock() out of
unthrottle_cfs_rq(), but that gives an even bigger mess.

Fixes: 8ad075c2eb1f ("sched: Async unthrottling for cfs bandwidth")
Reviewed-By: Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>
Suggested-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Hao Jia <jiahao.os@bytedance.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20230613082012.49615-4-jiahao.os@bytedance.com

cppcheck reports
kernel/sched/fair.c:7436:17: style: Local variable 'cpu_util' shadows outer function [shadowFunction]
  unsigned long cpu_util;
                ^

Clean this up by renaming the variable to eff_util

Signed-off-by: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230611122535.183654-1-trix@redhat.com

The responsiveness of the Per Entity Load Tracking (PELT) util_avg in
mobile devices is still considered too low for utilization changes
during task ramp-up.

In Android this manifests in the fact that the first frames of a UI
activity are very prone to be jankframes (a frame which doesn't meet
the required frame rendering time, e.g. 16ms@60Hz) since the CPU
frequency is normally low at this point and has to ramp up quickly.

The beginning of an UI activity is also characterized by the occurrence
of CPU contention, especially on little CPUs. Current little CPUs can
have an original CPU capacity of only ~ 150 which means that the actual
CPU capacity at lower frequency can even be much smaller.

Schedutil maps CPU util_avg into CPU frequency request via:

  util = effective_cpu_util(..., cpu_util_cfs(cpu), ...) ->
  util = map_util_perf(util) -> freq = map_util_freq(util, ...)

CPU contention for CFS tasks can be detected by 'CPU runnable > CPU
utililization' in cpu_util_cfs_boost() -> cpu_util(..., boost = 1).
Schedutil uses 'runnable boosting' by calling cpu_util_cfs_boost().

To be in sync with schedutil's CPU frequency selection, Energy Aware
Scheduling (EAS) also calls cpu_util(..., boost = 1) during max util
detection.

Moreover, 'runnable boosting' is also used in load-balance for busiest
CPU selection when the migration type is 'migrate_util', i.e. only at
sched domains which don't have the SD_SHARE_PKG_RESOURCES flag set.

Suggested-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230515115735.296329-3-dietmar.eggemann@arm.com

There is a lot of code duplication in cpu_util_next() & cpu_util_cfs().

Remove this by allowing cpu_util_next() to be called with p = NULL.
Rename cpu_util_next() to cpu_util() since the '_next' suffix is no
longer necessary to distinct cpu utilization related functions.
Implement cpu_util_cfs(cpu) as cpu_util(cpu, p = NULL, -1).

This will allow to code future related cpu util changes only in one
place, namely in cpu_util().

Signed-off-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230515115735.296329-2-dietmar.eggemann@arm.com