Skip to content

R
raspberrypi-kernel

openeuler / raspberrypi-kernel

通知 13
Star 1
Fork 0
R
raspberrypi-kernel
切换分支/标签
  1. 01 10月, 2015 1 次提交
  3. 23 9月, 2015 1 次提交
  5. 18 9月, 2015 1 次提交
  7. 11 9月, 2015 1 次提交
    • W
      sched: 'Annotate' migrate_tasks() · 5473e0cc
      由 Wanpeng Li 提交于 
      Kernel testing triggered this warning:

| WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 13 at kernel/sched/core.c:1156 do_set_cpus_allowed+0x7e/0x80()
| Modules linked in:
| CPU: 0 PID: 13 Comm: migration/0 Not tainted 4.2.0-rc1-00049-g25834c73 #2
| Call Trace:
|   dump_stack+0x4b/0x75
|   warn_slowpath_common+0x8b/0xc0
|   warn_slowpath_null+0x22/0x30
|   do_set_cpus_allowed+0x7e/0x80
|   cpuset_cpus_allowed_fallback+0x7c/0x170
|   select_fallback_rq+0x221/0x280
|   migration_call+0xe3/0x250
|   notifier_call_chain+0x53/0x70
|   __raw_notifier_call_chain+0x1e/0x30
|   cpu_notify+0x28/0x50
|   take_cpu_down+0x22/0x40
|   multi_cpu_stop+0xd5/0x140
|   cpu_stopper_thread+0xbc/0x170
|   smpboot_thread_fn+0x174/0x2f0
|   kthread+0xc4/0xe0
|   ret_from_kernel_thread+0x21/0x30

As Peterz pointed out:

| So the normal rules for changing task_struct::cpus_allowed are holding
| both pi_lock and rq->lock, such that holding either stabilizes the mask.
|
| This is so that wakeup can happen without rq->lock and load-balance
| without pi_lock.
|
| From this we already get the relaxation that we can omit acquiring
| rq->lock if the task is not on the rq, because in that case
| load-balancing will not apply to it.
|
| ** these are the rules currently tested in do_set_cpus_allowed() **
|
| Now, since __set_cpus_allowed_ptr() uses task_rq_lock() which
| unconditionally acquires both locks, we could get away with holding just
| rq->lock when on_rq for modification because that'd still exclude
| __set_cpus_allowed_ptr(), it would also work against
| __kthread_bind_mask() because that assumes !on_rq.
|
| That said, this is all somewhat fragile.
|
| Now, I don't think dropping rq->lock is quite as disastrous as it
| usually is because !cpu_active at this point, which means load-balance
| will not interfere, but that too is somewhat fragile.
|
| So we end up with a choice of two fragile..

This patch fixes it by following the rules for changing
task_struct::cpus_allowed with both pi_lock and rq->lock held.
Reported-by: Nkernel test robot <ying.huang@intel.com>
Reported-by: NSasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: NWanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>
[ Modified changelog and patch. ]
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/BLU436-SMTP1660820490DE202E3934ED3806E0@phx.gblSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
      5473e0cc
  9. 05 9月, 2015 1 次提交
  11. 02 9月, 2015 1 次提交
  13. 25 8月, 2015 1 次提交
    • J
      sched: Fix cpu_active_mask/cpu_online_mask race · dd9d3843
      由 Jan H. Schönherr 提交于 
      There is a race condition in SMP bootup code, which may result
in

    WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1 at kernel/workqueue.c:4418
    workqueue_cpu_up_callback()
or
    kernel BUG at kernel/smpboot.c:135!

It can be triggered with a bit of luck in Linux guests running
on busy hosts.

	CPU0                        CPUn
	====                        ====

	_cpu_up()
	  __cpu_up()
				    start_secondary()
				      set_cpu_online()
					cpumask_set_cpu(cpu,
						   to_cpumask(cpu_online_bits));
	  cpu_notify(CPU_ONLINE)
	    <do stuff, see below>
					cpumask_set_cpu(cpu,
						   to_cpumask(cpu_active_bits));

During the various CPU_ONLINE callbacks CPUn is online but not
active. Several things can go wrong at that point, depending on
the scheduling of tasks on CPU0.

Variant 1:

  cpu_notify(CPU_ONLINE)
    workqueue_cpu_up_callback()
      rebind_workers()
        set_cpus_allowed_ptr()

  This call fails because it requires an active CPU; rebind_workers()
  ends with a warning:

    WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1 at kernel/workqueue.c:4418
    workqueue_cpu_up_callback()

Variant 2:

  cpu_notify(CPU_ONLINE)
    smpboot_thread_call()
      smpboot_unpark_threads()
       ..
        __kthread_unpark()
          __kthread_bind()
          wake_up_state()
           ..
            select_task_rq()
              select_fallback_rq()

  The ->wake_cpu of the unparked thread is not allowed, making a call
  to select_fallback_rq() necessary. Then, select_fallback_rq() cannot
  find an allowed, active CPU and promptly resets the allowed CPUs, so
  that the task in question ends up on CPU0.

  When those unparked tasks are eventually executed, they run
  immediately into a BUG:

    kernel BUG at kernel/smpboot.c:135!

Just changing the order in which the online/active bits are set
(and adding some memory barriers), would solve the two issues
above. However, it would change the order of operations back to
the one before commit 6acbfb96 ("sched: Fix hotplug vs.
set_cpus_allowed_ptr()"), thus, reintroducing that particular
problem.

Going further back into history, we have at least the following
commits touching this topic:
- commit 2baab4e9 ("sched: Fix select_fallback_rq() vs cpu_active/cpu_online")
- commit 5fbd036b ("sched: Cleanup cpu_active madness")

Together, these give us the following non-working solutions:

  - secondary CPU sets active before online, because active is assumed to
    be a subset of online;

  - secondary CPU sets online before active, because the primary CPU
    assumes that an online CPU is also active;

  - secondary CPU sets online and waits for primary CPU to set active,
    because it might deadlock.

Commit 875ebe94 ("powerpc/smp: Wait until secondaries are
active & online") introduces an arch-specific solution to this
arch-independent problem.

Now, go for a more general solution without explicit waiting and
simply set active twice: once on the secondary CPU after online
was set and once on the primary CPU after online was seen.

set_cpus_allowed_ptr()")
Signed-off-by: NJan H. Schönherr <jschoenh@amazon.de>
Acked-by: NPeter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Matt Wilson <msw@amazon.com>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Fixes: 6acbfb96 ("sched: Fix hotplug vs. set_cpus_allowed_ptr()")
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1439408156-18840-1-git-send-email-jschoenh@amazon.deSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
      dd9d3843
  15. 12 8月, 2015 7 次提交
  17. 04 8月, 2015 1 次提交
  19. 03 8月, 2015 16 次提交
  21. 29 7月, 2015 1 次提交
  23. 23 7月, 2015 1 次提交
  25. 21 7月, 2015 1 次提交
  27. 15 7月, 2015 1 次提交
    • A
      cgroup: allow a cgroup subsystem to reject a fork · 7e47682e
      由 Aleksa Sarai 提交于 
      Add a new cgroup subsystem callback can_fork that conditionally
states whether or not the fork is accepted or rejected by a cgroup
policy. In addition, add a cancel_fork callback so that if an error
occurs later in the forking process, any state modified by can_fork can
be reverted.

Allow for a private opaque pointer to be passed from cgroup_can_fork to
cgroup_post_fork, allowing for the fork state to be stored by each
subsystem separately.

Also add a tagging system for cgroup_subsys.h to allow for CGROUP_<TAG>
enumerations to be be defined and used. In addition, explicitly add a
CGROUP_CANFORK_COUNT macro to make arrays easier to define.

This is in preparation for implementing the pids cgroup subsystem.
Signed-off-by: NAleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>
Signed-off-by: NTejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
      7e47682e
  29. 07 7月, 2015 5 次提交