Re: [RT] BUG in sched/cpupri.c

From: John Keeping <john@metanate.com>
To: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Cc: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
	linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RT] BUG in sched/cpupri.c
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 18:45:33 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211222184533.4c14868c.john@metanate.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <31a47e99-6de3-76ec-62ad-9c98d092ead5@arm.com>

On Wed, 22 Dec 2021 18:46:57 +0100
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> wrote:

> On 21.12.21 17:45, John Keeping wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 16:11:34 +0000
> > Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> On 20/12/21 18:35, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:  
> 
> [...]
> 
> >> diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> >> index fd7c4f972aaf..7d61ceec1a3b 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> >> @@ -2467,10 +2467,13 @@ static void switched_from_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> >>  	 * this is the right place to try to pull some other one
> >>  	 * from an overloaded CPU, if any.
> >>  	 */
> >> -	if (!task_on_rq_queued(p) || rq->dl.dl_nr_running)
> >> +	if (!task_on_rq_queued(p))
> >>  		return;
> >>  
> >> -	deadline_queue_pull_task(rq);
> >> +	if (!rq->dl.dl_nr_running)
> >> +		deadline_queue_pull_task(rq);
> >> +	else if (task_current(rq, p) && (p->sched_class < &dl_sched_class))
> >> +		resched_curr(rq);
> >>  }
> >>  
> >>  /*
> >> diff --git a/kernel/sched/rt.c b/kernel/sched/rt.c
> >> index ef8228d19382..1ea2567612fb 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/sched/rt.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/sched/rt.c
> >> @@ -2322,10 +2322,13 @@ static void switched_from_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> >>  	 * we may need to handle the pulling of RT tasks
> >>  	 * now.
> >>  	 */
> >> -	if (!task_on_rq_queued(p) || rq->rt.rt_nr_running)
> >> +	if (!task_on_rq_queued(p))
> >>  		return;
> >>  
> >> -	rt_queue_pull_task(rq);
> >> +	if (!rq->rt.rt_nr_running)
> >> +		rt_queue_pull_task(rq);
> >> +	else if (task_current(rq, p) && (p->sched_class < &rt_sched_class))
> >> +		resched_curr(rq);  
> 
> switched_from_rt() -> rt_queue_pull_task(, pull_rt_task)
>   pull_rt_task()->tell_cpu_to_push()->irq_work_queue_on(&rq->rd->rto_push_work,)
>     rto_push_irq_work_func() -> push_rt_task(rq, true)
> 
> seems to be the only way with pull=true.
> 
> In my tests, rq->rt.rt_nr_running seems to be 0 when it happens.
> 
> [   22.288537] CPU3 switched_to_rt: p=[ksoftirqd/3 35]
> [   22.288554] rt_mutex_setprio: CPU3 p=[ksoftirqd/3 35] pi_task=[rcu_preempt 11] queued=1 running=0 prio=98 oldprio=120
> [   22.288636] CPU3 switched_from_rt: p=[ksoftirqd/3 35] rq->rt.rt_nr_running=0
>                                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
> [   22.288649] rt_mutex_setprio: CPU3 p=[ksoftirqd/3 35] queued=1 running=1 prio=120 oldprio=98
> [   22.288681] CPU3 push_rt_task: next_task=[rcu_preempt 11] migr_dis=1 rq->curr=[ksoftirqd/3 35] pull=1
>                                                              ^^^^^^^^^^                           ^^^^^^ 
> [   22.288698] CPU: 3 PID: 35 Comm: ksoftirqd/3 Not tainted 5.15.10-rt24-dirty #36
> [   22.288711] Hardware name: ARM Juno development board (r0) (DT)
> [   22.288718] Call trace:
> [   22.288722]  dump_backtrace+0x0/0x1ac
> [   22.288747]  show_stack+0x1c/0x70
> [   22.288763]  dump_stack_lvl+0x68/0x84
> [   22.288777]  dump_stack+0x1c/0x38
> [   22.288788]  push_rt_task.part.0+0x364/0x370
> [   22.288805]  rto_push_irq_work_func+0x180/0x190
> [   22.288821]  irq_work_single+0x34/0xa0
> [   22.288836]  flush_smp_call_function_queue+0x138/0x244
> [   22.288852]  generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt+0x18/0x24
> [   22.288867]  ipi_handler+0xb0/0x15c
> ...
> 
> What about slightly changing the layout in switched_from_rt() (only lightly tested):

I still see the BUG splat with the patch below applied :-(

> @@ -2322,7 +2338,15 @@ static void switched_from_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
>          * we may need to handle the pulling of RT tasks
>          * now.
>          */
> -       if (!task_on_rq_queued(p) || rq->rt.rt_nr_running)
> +       if (!task_on_rq_queued(p))
> +               return;
> +
> +       if (task_current(rq, p) && (p->sched_class < &rt_sched_class)) {
> +               resched_curr(rq);
> +               return;
> +       }
> +
> +       if (rq->rt.rt_nr_running)
>                 return;
>  
>         rt_queue_pull_task(rq);