sched/core: Fix RQCF_ACT_SKIP leak

Igor Raits and Bagas Sanjaya report a RQCF_ACT_SKIP leak warning.

This warning may be triggered in the following situations:

    CPU0                                      CPU1

__schedule()
  *rq->clock_update_flags <<= 1;*   unregister_fair_sched_group()
  pick_next_task_fair+0x4a/0x410      destroy_cfs_bandwidth()
    newidle_balance+0x115/0x3e0       for_each_possible_cpu(i) *i=0*
      rq_unpin_lock(this_rq, rf)      __cfsb_csd_unthrottle()
      raw_spin_rq_unlock(this_rq)
                                      rq_lock(*CPU0_rq*, &rf)
                                      rq_clock_start_loop_update()
                                      rq->clock_update_flags & RQCF_ACT_SKIP <--
      raw_spin_rq_lock(this_rq)

The purpose of RQCF_ACT_SKIP is to skip the update rq clock,
but the update is very early in __schedule(), but we clear
RQCF_*_SKIP very late, causing it to span that gap above
and triggering this warning.

In __schedule() we can clear the RQCF_*_SKIP flag immediately
after update_rq_clock() to avoid this RQCF_ACT_SKIP leak warning.
And set rq->clock_update_flags to RQCF_UPDATED to avoid
rq->clock_update_flags < RQCF_ACT_SKIP warning that may be triggered later.

Fixes: ebb83d84e4 ("sched/core: Avoid multiple calling update_rq_clock() in __cfsb_csd_unthrottle()")
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230913082424.73252-1-jiahao.os@bytedance.com
Reported-by: Igor Raits <igor.raits@gmail.com>
Reported-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Hao Jia <jiahao.os@bytedance.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/a5dd536d-041a-2ce9-f4b7-64d8d85c86dc@gmail.com
This commit is contained in:
Hao Jia 2023-10-12 17:00:03 +08:00 committed by Peter Zijlstra
parent 4e5b65a22b
commit 5ebde09d91

View File

@ -5361,8 +5361,6 @@ context_switch(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev,
/* switch_mm_cid() requires the memory barriers above. */
switch_mm_cid(rq, prev, next);
rq->clock_update_flags &= ~(RQCF_ACT_SKIP|RQCF_REQ_SKIP);
prepare_lock_switch(rq, next, rf);
/* Here we just switch the register state and the stack. */
@ -6600,6 +6598,7 @@ static void __sched notrace __schedule(unsigned int sched_mode)
/* Promote REQ to ACT */
rq->clock_update_flags <<= 1;
update_rq_clock(rq);
rq->clock_update_flags = RQCF_UPDATED;
switch_count = &prev->nivcsw;
@ -6679,8 +6678,6 @@ static void __sched notrace __schedule(unsigned int sched_mode)
/* Also unlocks the rq: */
rq = context_switch(rq, prev, next, &rf);
} else {
rq->clock_update_flags &= ~(RQCF_ACT_SKIP|RQCF_REQ_SKIP);
rq_unpin_lock(rq, &rf);
__balance_callbacks(rq);
raw_spin_rq_unlock_irq(rq);