From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>, Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>, Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>, Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>, kernel-team@android.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 08/19] sched: Reject CPU affinity changes based on task_cpu_possible_mask() Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2021 18:11:52 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <874kedeeqv.mognet@arm.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20210602164719.31777-9-will@kernel.org> On 02/06/21 17:47, Will Deacon wrote: > Reject explicit requests to change the affinity mask of a task via > set_cpus_allowed_ptr() if the requested mask is not a subset of the > mask returned by task_cpu_possible_mask(). This ensures that the > 'cpus_mask' for a given task cannot contain CPUs which are incapable of > executing it, except in cases where the affinity is forced. > > Reviewed-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> > Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> One comment/observation below, but regardless: Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <Valentin.Schneider@arm.com> > --- > kernel/sched/core.c | 9 ++++++++- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c > index 0c1b6f1a6c91..b23c7f0ab31a 100644 > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c > @@ -2347,15 +2347,17 @@ static int __set_cpus_allowed_ptr(struct task_struct *p, > u32 flags) > { > const struct cpumask *cpu_valid_mask = cpu_active_mask; > + const struct cpumask *cpu_allowed_mask = task_cpu_possible_mask(p); > unsigned int dest_cpu; > struct rq_flags rf; > struct rq *rq; > int ret = 0; > + bool kthread = p->flags & PF_KTHREAD; > > rq = task_rq_lock(p, &rf); > update_rq_clock(rq); > > - if (p->flags & PF_KTHREAD || is_migration_disabled(p)) { > + if (kthread || is_migration_disabled(p)) { > /* > * Kernel threads are allowed on online && !active CPUs, > * however, during cpu-hot-unplug, even these might get pushed > @@ -2369,6 +2371,11 @@ static int __set_cpus_allowed_ptr(struct task_struct *p, > cpu_valid_mask = cpu_online_mask; > } > > + if (!kthread && !cpumask_subset(new_mask, cpu_allowed_mask)) { > + ret = -EINVAL; > + goto out; > + } > + IIUC this wouldn't be required if guarantee_online_cpus() couldn't build a mask that extends beyond task_cpu_possible_mask(p): if the new mask doesn't intersect with that possible mask, it means we're carrying an empty cpumask and the cpumask_any_and_distribute() below would return nr_cpu_ids, so we'd bail with -EINVAL. I don't really see a way around it though due to the expectations behind guarantee_online_cpus() :/ > /* > * Must re-check here, to close a race against __kthread_bind(), > * sched_setaffinity() is not guaranteed to observe the flag. > -- > 2.32.0.rc0.204.g9fa02ecfa5-goog
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>, Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>, Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>, Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>, kernel-team@android.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 08/19] sched: Reject CPU affinity changes based on task_cpu_possible_mask() Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2021 18:11:52 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <874kedeeqv.mognet@arm.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20210602164719.31777-9-will@kernel.org> On 02/06/21 17:47, Will Deacon wrote: > Reject explicit requests to change the affinity mask of a task via > set_cpus_allowed_ptr() if the requested mask is not a subset of the > mask returned by task_cpu_possible_mask(). This ensures that the > 'cpus_mask' for a given task cannot contain CPUs which are incapable of > executing it, except in cases where the affinity is forced. > > Reviewed-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> > Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> One comment/observation below, but regardless: Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <Valentin.Schneider@arm.com> > --- > kernel/sched/core.c | 9 ++++++++- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c > index 0c1b6f1a6c91..b23c7f0ab31a 100644 > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c > @@ -2347,15 +2347,17 @@ static int __set_cpus_allowed_ptr(struct task_struct *p, > u32 flags) > { > const struct cpumask *cpu_valid_mask = cpu_active_mask; > + const struct cpumask *cpu_allowed_mask = task_cpu_possible_mask(p); > unsigned int dest_cpu; > struct rq_flags rf; > struct rq *rq; > int ret = 0; > + bool kthread = p->flags & PF_KTHREAD; > > rq = task_rq_lock(p, &rf); > update_rq_clock(rq); > > - if (p->flags & PF_KTHREAD || is_migration_disabled(p)) { > + if (kthread || is_migration_disabled(p)) { > /* > * Kernel threads are allowed on online && !active CPUs, > * however, during cpu-hot-unplug, even these might get pushed > @@ -2369,6 +2371,11 @@ static int __set_cpus_allowed_ptr(struct task_struct *p, > cpu_valid_mask = cpu_online_mask; > } > > + if (!kthread && !cpumask_subset(new_mask, cpu_allowed_mask)) { > + ret = -EINVAL; > + goto out; > + } > + IIUC this wouldn't be required if guarantee_online_cpus() couldn't build a mask that extends beyond task_cpu_possible_mask(p): if the new mask doesn't intersect with that possible mask, it means we're carrying an empty cpumask and the cpumask_any_and_distribute() below would return nr_cpu_ids, so we'd bail with -EINVAL. I don't really see a way around it though due to the expectations behind guarantee_online_cpus() :/ > /* > * Must re-check here, to close a race against __kthread_bind(), > * sched_setaffinity() is not guaranteed to observe the flag. > -- > 2.32.0.rc0.204.g9fa02ecfa5-goog _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-04 17:12 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 96+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-06-02 16:47 [PATCH v8 00/19] Add support for 32-bit tasks on asymmetric AArch32 systems Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v8 01/19] arm64: cpuinfo: Split AArch32 registers out into a separate struct Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-03 12:38 ` Mark Rutland 2021-06-03 12:38 ` Mark Rutland 2021-06-03 17:24 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-03 17:24 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v8 02/19] arm64: Allow mismatched 32-bit EL0 support Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-03 12:37 ` Mark Rutland 2021-06-03 12:37 ` Mark Rutland 2021-06-03 17:44 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-03 17:44 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-04 9:38 ` Mark Rutland 2021-06-04 9:38 ` Mark Rutland 2021-06-04 11:05 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-04 11:05 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-04 12:04 ` Mark Rutland 2021-06-04 12:04 ` Mark Rutland 2021-06-04 13:50 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-04 13:50 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v8 03/19] KVM: arm64: Kill 32-bit vCPUs on systems with mismatched " Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v8 04/19] arm64: Kill 32-bit applications scheduled on 64-bit-only CPUs Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v8 05/19] sched: Introduce task_cpu_possible_mask() to limit fallback rq selection Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-04 17:10 ` Valentin Schneider 2021-06-04 17:10 ` Valentin Schneider 2021-06-07 17:04 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-07 17:04 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v8 06/19] cpuset: Don't use the cpu_possible_mask as a last resort for cgroup v1 Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-04 17:11 ` Valentin Schneider 2021-06-04 17:11 ` Valentin Schneider 2021-06-07 17:20 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-07 17:20 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-10 10:20 ` Valentin Schneider 2021-06-10 10:20 ` Valentin Schneider 2021-06-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v8 07/19] cpuset: Honour task_cpu_possible_mask() in guarantee_online_cpus() Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-04 17:11 ` Valentin Schneider 2021-06-04 17:11 ` Valentin Schneider 2021-06-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v8 08/19] sched: Reject CPU affinity changes based on task_cpu_possible_mask() Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-04 17:11 ` Valentin Schneider [this message] 2021-06-04 17:11 ` Valentin Schneider 2021-06-07 22:43 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-07 22:43 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v8 09/19] sched: Introduce task_struct::user_cpus_ptr to track requested affinity Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-04 17:12 ` Valentin Schneider 2021-06-04 17:12 ` Valentin Schneider 2021-06-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v8 10/19] sched: Split the guts of sched_setaffinity() into a helper function Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-04 17:12 ` Valentin Schneider 2021-06-04 17:12 ` Valentin Schneider 2021-06-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v8 11/19] sched: Allow task CPU affinity to be restricted on asymmetric systems Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-04 17:12 ` Valentin Schneider 2021-06-04 17:12 ` Valentin Schneider 2021-06-07 22:52 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-07 22:52 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-10 10:20 ` Valentin Schneider 2021-06-10 10:20 ` Valentin Schneider 2021-06-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v8 12/19] sched: Introduce task_cpus_dl_admissible() to check proposed affinity Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-03 9:43 ` Daniel Bristot de Oliveira 2021-06-03 9:43 ` Daniel Bristot de Oliveira 2021-06-03 9:52 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-03 9:52 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v8 13/19] arm64: Implement task_cpu_possible_mask() Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v8 14/19] arm64: exec: Adjust affinity for compat tasks with mismatched 32-bit EL0 Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-03 9:45 ` Daniel Bristot de Oliveira 2021-06-03 9:45 ` Daniel Bristot de Oliveira 2021-06-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v8 15/19] arm64: Prevent offlining first CPU with 32-bit EL0 on mismatched system Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-03 12:58 ` Mark Rutland 2021-06-03 12:58 ` Mark Rutland 2021-06-03 17:40 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-03 17:40 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-04 9:49 ` Mark Rutland 2021-06-04 9:49 ` Mark Rutland 2021-06-04 12:14 ` Qais Yousef 2021-06-04 12:14 ` Qais Yousef 2021-06-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v8 16/19] arm64: Advertise CPUs capable of running 32-bit applications in sysfs Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v8 17/19] arm64: Hook up cmdline parameter to allow mismatched 32-bit EL0 Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v8 18/19] arm64: Remove logic to kill 32-bit tasks on 64-bit-only cores Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v8 19/19] Documentation: arm64: describe asymmetric 32-bit support Will Deacon 2021-06-02 16:47 ` Will Deacon
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=874kedeeqv.mognet@arm.com \ --to=valentin.schneider@arm.com \ --cc=bristot@redhat.com \ --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \ --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \ --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \ --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \ --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \ --cc=kernel-team@android.com \ --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=maz@kernel.org \ --cc=mingo@redhat.com \ --cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \ --cc=peterz@infradead.org \ --cc=qais.yousef@arm.com \ --cc=qperret@google.com \ --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \ --cc=surenb@google.com \ --cc=tj@kernel.org \ --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \ --cc=will@kernel.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.