linux-stable.git/kernel/sched/rt.c, branch v5.15.26

sched/rt: Try to restart rt period timer when rt runtime exceeded

2022-01-27T10:03:30+00:00

[ Upstream commit 9b58e976b3b391c0cf02e038d53dd0478ed3013c ]

When rt_runtime is modified from -1 to a valid control value, it may
cause the task to be throttled all the time. Operations like the following
will trigger the bug. E.g:

  1. echo -1 > /proc/sys/kernel/sched_rt_runtime_us
  2. Run a FIFO task named A that executes while(1)
  3. echo 950000 > /proc/sys/kernel/sched_rt_runtime_us

When rt_runtime is -1, The rt period timer will not be activated when task
A enqueued. And then the task will be throttled after setting rt_runtime to
950,000. The task will always be throttled because the rt period timer is
not activated.

Fixes: d0b27fa77854 ("sched: rt-group: synchonised bandwidth period")
Reported-by: Hulk Robot 
Signed-off-by: Li Hua 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20211203033618.11895-1-hucool.lihua@huawei.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

sched/fair: Prevent dead task groups from regaining cfs_rq's

2021-11-25T08:48:32+00:00

[ Upstream commit b027789e5e50494c2325cc70c8642e7fd6059479 ]

Kevin is reporting crashes which point to a use-after-free of a cfs_rq
in update_blocked_averages(). Initial debugging revealed that we've
live cfs_rq's (on_list=1) in an about to be kfree()'d task group in
free_fair_sched_group(). However, it was unclear how that can happen.

His kernel config happened to lead to a layout of struct sched_entity
that put the 'my_q' member directly into the middle of the object
which makes it incidentally overlap with SLUB's freelist pointer.
That, in combination with SLAB_FREELIST_HARDENED's freelist pointer
mangling, leads to a reliable access violation in form of a #GP which
made the UAF fail fast.

Michal seems to have run into the same issue[1]. He already correctly
diagnosed that commit a7b359fc6a37 ("sched/fair: Correctly insert
cfs_rq's to list on unthrottle") is causing the preconditions for the
UAF to happen by re-adding cfs_rq's also to task groups that have no
more running tasks, i.e. also to dead ones. His analysis, however,
misses the real root cause and it cannot be seen from the crash
backtrace only, as the real offender is tg_unthrottle_up() getting
called via sched_cfs_period_timer() via the timer interrupt at an
inconvenient time.

When unregister_fair_sched_group() unlinks all cfs_rq's from the dying
task group, it doesn't protect itself from getting interrupted. If the
timer interrupt triggers while we iterate over all CPUs or after
unregister_fair_sched_group() has finished but prior to unlinking the
task group, sched_cfs_period_timer() will execute and walk the list of
task groups, trying to unthrottle cfs_rq's, i.e. re-add them to the
dying task group. These will later -- in free_fair_sched_group() -- be
kfree()'ed while still being linked, leading to the fireworks Kevin
and Michal are seeing.

To fix this race, ensure the dying task group gets unlinked first.
However, simply switching the order of unregistering and unlinking the
task group isn't sufficient, as concurrent RCU walkers might still see
it, as can be seen below:

    CPU1:                                      CPU2:
      :                                        timer IRQ:
      :                                          do_sched_cfs_period_timer():
      :                                            :
      :                                            distribute_cfs_runtime():
      :                                              rcu_read_lock();
      :                                              :
      :                                              unthrottle_cfs_rq():
    sched_offline_group():                             :
      :                                                walk_tg_tree_from(…,tg_unthrottle_up,…):
      list_del_rcu(&tg->list);                           :
 (1)  :                                                  list_for_each_entry_rcu(child, &parent->children, siblings)
      :                                                    :
 (2)  list_del_rcu(&tg->siblings);                         :
      :                                                    tg_unthrottle_up():
      unregister_fair_sched_group():                         struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq = tg->cfs_rq[cpu_of(rq)];
        :                                                    :
        list_del_leaf_cfs_rq(tg->cfs_rq[cpu]);               :
        :                                                    :
        :                                                    if (!cfs_rq_is_decayed(cfs_rq) || cfs_rq->nr_running)
 (3)    :                                                        list_add_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
      :                                                      :
      :                                                    :
      :                                                  :
      :                                                :
      :                                              :
 (4)  :                                              rcu_read_unlock();

CPU 2 walks the task group list in parallel to sched_offline_group(),
specifically, it'll read the soon to be unlinked task group entry at
(1). Unlinking it on CPU 1 at (2) therefore won't prevent CPU 2 from
still passing it on to tg_unthrottle_up(). CPU 1 now tries to unlink
all cfs_rq's via list_del_leaf_cfs_rq() in
unregister_fair_sched_group().  Meanwhile CPU 2 will re-add some of
these at (3), which is the cause of the UAF later on.

To prevent this additional race from happening, we need to wait until
walk_tg_tree_from() has finished traversing the task groups, i.e.
after the RCU read critical section ends in (4). Afterwards we're safe
to call unregister_fair_sched_group(), as each new walk won't see the
dying task group any more.

On top of that, we need to wait yet another RCU grace period after
unregister_fair_sched_group() to ensure print_cfs_stats(), which might
run concurrently, always sees valid objects, i.e. not already free'd
ones.

This patch survives Michal's reproducer[2] for 8h+ now, which used to
trigger within minutes before.

  [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20211011172236.11223-1-mkoutny@suse.com/
  [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20211102160228.GA57072@blackbody.suse.cz/

Fixes: a7b359fc6a37 ("sched/fair: Correctly insert cfs_rq's to list on unthrottle")
[peterz: shuffle code around a bit]
Reported-by: Kevin Tanguy 
Signed-off-by: Mathias Krause 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

sched/rt: Fix RT utilization tracking during policy change

2021-06-22T14:41:59+00:00

RT keeps track of the utilization on a per-rq basis with the structure
avg_rt. This utilization is updated during task_tick_rt(),
put_prev_task_rt() and set_next_task_rt(). However, when the current
running task changes its policy, set_next_task_rt() which would usually
take care of updating the utilization when the rq starts running RT tasks,
will not see a such change, leaving the avg_rt structure outdated. When
that very same task will be dequeued later, put_prev_task_rt() will then
update the utilization, based on a wrong last_update_time, leading to a
huge spike in the RT utilization signal.

The signal would eventually recover from this issue after few ms. Even if
no RT tasks are run, avg_rt is also updated in __update_blocked_others().
But as the CPU capacity depends partly on the avg_rt, this issue has
nonetheless a significant impact on the scheduler.

Fix this issue by ensuring a load update when a running task changes
its policy to RT.

Fixes: 371bf427 ("sched/rt: Add rt_rq utilization tracking")
Signed-off-by: Vincent Donnefort 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1624271872-211872-2-git-send-email-vincent.donnefort@arm.com

sched: Introduce sched_class::pick_task()

2021-05-12T09:43:28+00:00

Because sched_class::pick_next_task() also implies
sched_class::set_next_task() (and possibly put_prev_task() and
newidle_balance) it is not state invariant. This makes it unsuitable
for remote task selection.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
[Vineeth: folded fixes]
Signed-off-by: Vineeth Remanan Pillai 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Tested-by: Don Hiatt 
Tested-by: Hongyu Ning 
Tested-by: Vincent Guittot 
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210422123308.437092775@infradead.org

sched: Wrap rq::lock access

2021-05-12T09:43:26+00:00

In preparation of playing games with rq->lock, abstract the thing
using an accessor.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Tested-by: Don Hiatt 
Tested-by: Hongyu Ning 
Tested-by: Vincent Guittot 
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210422123308.136465446@infradead.org

sched: Fix various typos

2021-03-21T23:11:52+00:00

Fix ~42 single-word typos in scheduler code comments.

We have accumulated a few fun ones over the years. :-)

Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar 
Cc: Peter Zijlstra 
Cc: Mike Galbraith 
Cc: Juri Lelli 
Cc: Vincent Guittot 
Cc: Dietmar Eggemann 
Cc: Steven Rostedt 
Cc: Ben Segall 
Cc: Mel Gorman 
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

sched: Use task_current() instead of 'rq->curr == p'

2021-01-14T10:20:11+00:00

Use the task_current() function where appropriate.

No functional change.

Signed-off-by: Hui Su 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) 
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201030173223.GA52339@rlk

sched: Remove select_task_rq()'s sd_flag parameter

2020-11-10T17:39:06+00:00

Only select_task_rq_fair() uses that parameter to do an actual domain
search, other classes only care about what kind of wakeup is happening
(fork, exec, or "regular") and thus just translate the flag into a wakeup
type.

WF_TTWU and WF_EXEC have just been added, use these along with WF_FORK to
encode the wakeup types we care about. For select_task_rq_fair(), we can
simply use the shiny new WF_flag : SD_flag mapping.

Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201102184514.2733-3-valentin.schneider@arm.com

Merge branch 'sched/migrate-disable'

2020-11-10T17:39:04+00:00

sched: Fix migrate_disable() vs rt/dl balancing

2020-11-10T17:39:01+00:00

In order to minimize the interference of migrate_disable() on lower
priority tasks, which can be deprived of runtime due to being stuck
below a higher priority task. Teach the RT/DL balancers to push away
these higher priority tasks when a lower priority task gets selected
to run on a freshly demoted CPU (pull).

This adds migration interference to the higher priority task, but
restores bandwidth to system that would otherwise be irrevocably lost.
Without this it would be possible to have all tasks on the system
stuck on a single CPU, each task preempted in a migrate_disable()
section with a single high priority task running.

This way we can still approximate running the M highest priority tasks
on the system.

Migrating the top task away is (ofcourse) still subject to
migrate_disable() too, which means the lower task is subject to an
interference equivalent to the worst case migrate_disable() section.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Reviewed-by: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira 
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201023102347.499155098@infradead.org