diff options
author | Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> | 2019-11-08 13:11:52 +0300 |
---|---|---|
committer | Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> | 2019-11-09 00:34:14 +0300 |
commit | 6e2df0581f569038719cf2bc2b3baa3fcc83cab4 (patch) | |
tree | 91a337f916b868f9a73864949698dd27762d9a8e /kernel/sched/deadline.c | |
parent | e3b8b6a0d12cccf772113d6b5c1875192186fbd4 (diff) | |
download | linux-6e2df0581f569038719cf2bc2b3baa3fcc83cab4.tar.xz |
sched: Fix pick_next_task() vs 'change' pattern race
Commit 67692435c411 ("sched: Rework pick_next_task() slow-path")
inadvertly introduced a race because it changed a previously
unexplored dependency between dropping the rq->lock and
sched_class::put_prev_task().
The comments about dropping rq->lock, in for example
newidle_balance(), only mentions the task being current and ->on_cpu
being set. But when we look at the 'change' pattern (in for example
sched_setnuma()):
queued = task_on_rq_queued(p); /* p->on_rq == TASK_ON_RQ_QUEUED */
running = task_current(rq, p); /* rq->curr == p */
if (queued)
dequeue_task(...);
if (running)
put_prev_task(...);
/* change task properties */
if (queued)
enqueue_task(...);
if (running)
set_next_task(...);
It becomes obvious that if we do this after put_prev_task() has
already been called on @p, things go sideways. This is exactly what
the commit in question allows to happen when it does:
prev->sched_class->put_prev_task(rq, prev, rf);
if (!rq->nr_running)
newidle_balance(rq, rf);
The newidle_balance() call will drop rq->lock after we've called
put_prev_task() and that allows the above 'change' pattern to
interleave and mess up the state.
Furthermore, it turns out we lost the RT-pull when we put the last DL
task.
Fix both problems by extracting the balancing from put_prev_task() and
doing a multi-class balance() pass before put_prev_task().
Fixes: 67692435c411 ("sched: Rework pick_next_task() slow-path")
Reported-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'kernel/sched/deadline.c')
-rw-r--r-- | kernel/sched/deadline.c | 40 |
1 files changed, 20 insertions, 20 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c index 2dc48720f189..a8a08030a8f7 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c +++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c @@ -1691,6 +1691,22 @@ static void check_preempt_equal_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p) resched_curr(rq); } +static int balance_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, struct rq_flags *rf) +{ + if (!on_dl_rq(&p->dl) && need_pull_dl_task(rq, p)) { + /* + * This is OK, because current is on_cpu, which avoids it being + * picked for load-balance and preemption/IRQs are still + * disabled avoiding further scheduler activity on it and we've + * not yet started the picking loop. + */ + rq_unpin_lock(rq, rf); + pull_dl_task(rq); + rq_repin_lock(rq, rf); + } + + return sched_stop_runnable(rq) || sched_dl_runnable(rq); +} #endif /* CONFIG_SMP */ /* @@ -1758,45 +1774,28 @@ static struct task_struct * pick_next_task_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf) { struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se; + struct dl_rq *dl_rq = &rq->dl; struct task_struct *p; - struct dl_rq *dl_rq; WARN_ON_ONCE(prev || rf); - dl_rq = &rq->dl; - - if (unlikely(!dl_rq->dl_nr_running)) + if (!sched_dl_runnable(rq)) return NULL; dl_se = pick_next_dl_entity(rq, dl_rq); BUG_ON(!dl_se); - p = dl_task_of(dl_se); - set_next_task_dl(rq, p); - return p; } -static void put_prev_task_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, struct rq_flags *rf) +static void put_prev_task_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p) { update_curr_dl(rq); update_dl_rq_load_avg(rq_clock_pelt(rq), rq, 1); if (on_dl_rq(&p->dl) && p->nr_cpus_allowed > 1) enqueue_pushable_dl_task(rq, p); - - if (rf && !on_dl_rq(&p->dl) && need_pull_dl_task(rq, p)) { - /* - * This is OK, because current is on_cpu, which avoids it being - * picked for load-balance and preemption/IRQs are still - * disabled avoiding further scheduler activity on it and we've - * not yet started the picking loop. - */ - rq_unpin_lock(rq, rf); - pull_dl_task(rq); - rq_repin_lock(rq, rf); - } } /* @@ -2442,6 +2441,7 @@ const struct sched_class dl_sched_class = { .set_next_task = set_next_task_dl, #ifdef CONFIG_SMP + .balance = balance_dl, .select_task_rq = select_task_rq_dl, .migrate_task_rq = migrate_task_rq_dl, .set_cpus_allowed = set_cpus_allowed_dl, |