From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932620AbdGSK1k (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jul 2017 06:27:40 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:43644 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754088AbdGSK1h (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jul 2017 06:27:37 -0400 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , stable@vger.kernel.org, "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" , Linus Torvalds , Mike Galbraith , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar Subject: [PATCH 4.9 65/72] sched/topology: Fix overlapping sched_group_mask Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 12:24:59 +0200 Message-Id: <20170719102446.154694772@linuxfoundation.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.13.3 In-Reply-To: <20170719102435.760649060@linuxfoundation.org> References: <20170719102435.760649060@linuxfoundation.org> User-Agent: quilt/0.65 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 4.9-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Peter Zijlstra commit 73bb059f9b8a00c5e1bf2f7ca83138c05d05e600 upstream. The point of sched_group_mask is to select those CPUs from sched_group_cpus that can actually arrive at this balance domain. The current code gets it wrong, as can be readily demonstrated with a topology like: node 0 1 2 3 0: 10 20 30 20 1: 20 10 20 30 2: 30 20 10 20 3: 20 30 20 10 Where (for example) domain 1 on CPU1 ends up with a mask that includes CPU0: [] CPU1 attaching sched-domain: [] domain 0: span 0-2 level NUMA [] groups: 1 (mask: 1), 2, 0 [] domain 1: span 0-3 level NUMA [] groups: 0-2 (mask: 0-2) (cpu_capacity: 3072), 0,2-3 (cpu_capacity: 3072) This causes sched_balance_cpu() to compute the wrong CPU and consequently should_we_balance() will terminate early resulting in missed load-balance opportunities. The fixed topology looks like: [] CPU1 attaching sched-domain: [] domain 0: span 0-2 level NUMA [] groups: 1 (mask: 1), 2, 0 [] domain 1: span 0-3 level NUMA [] groups: 0-2 (mask: 1) (cpu_capacity: 3072), 0,2-3 (cpu_capacity: 3072) (note: this relies on OVERLAP domains to always have children, this is true because the regular topology domains are still here -- this is before degenerate trimming) Debugged-by: Lauro Ramos Venancio Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Mike Galbraith Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Fixes: e3589f6c81e4 ("sched: Allow for overlapping sched_domain spans") Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- kernel/sched/core.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) --- a/kernel/sched/core.c +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c @@ -6102,6 +6102,9 @@ enum s_alloc { * Build an iteration mask that can exclude certain CPUs from the upwards * domain traversal. * + * Only CPUs that can arrive at this group should be considered to continue + * balancing. + * * Asymmetric node setups can result in situations where the domain tree is of * unequal depth, make sure to skip domains that already cover the entire * range. @@ -6120,11 +6123,24 @@ static void build_group_mask(struct sche for_each_cpu(i, sg_span) { sibling = *per_cpu_ptr(sdd->sd, i); - if (!cpumask_test_cpu(i, sched_domain_span(sibling))) + + /* + * Can happen in the asymmetric case, where these siblings are + * unused. The mask will not be empty because those CPUs that + * do have the top domain _should_ span the domain. + */ + if (!sibling->child) + continue; + + /* If we would not end up here, we can't continue from here */ + if (!cpumask_equal(sg_span, sched_domain_span(sibling->child))) continue; cpumask_set_cpu(i, sched_group_mask(sg)); } + + /* We must not have empty masks here */ + WARN_ON_ONCE(cpumask_empty(sched_group_mask(sg))); } /*