All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Zhang Qiao <zhangqiao22@huawei.com>
To: "Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, <lizefan.x@bytedance.com>,
	<hannes@cmpxchg.org>, <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Question] set_cpus_allowed_ptr() call failed at cpuset_attach()
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:14:22 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ff49c096-39d9-4215-5b4f-8af2fd7c0c91@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220119130221.GA31037@blackbody.suse.cz>

hello

在 2022/1/19 21:02, Michal Koutný 写道:
> On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 09:15:06AM +0800, Zhang Qiao <zhangqiao22@huawei.com> wrote:
>> 	I found the following warning log on qemu. I migrated a task from one cpuset cgroup to
>> another, while I also performed the cpu hotplug operation, and got following calltrace.
> 
> Do you have more information on what hotplug event and what error
> (from set_cpus_allowed_ptr() you observe? (And what's src/dst cpuset wrt
> root/non-root)?
  I ran the LTP testcases and a test scripts that do hotplug on a random cpu at the same time.
  The race condition quickly, and I can't reproduce it so far.
  By reading code about set_cpus_allowed_ptr(), i think __set_cpus_allowed_ptr_locked() will
be failed when new_mask and cpu_active_mask do not intersect, as follows:

 __set_cpus_allowed_ptr_locked():
	....
	const struct cpumask *cpu_valid_mask = cpu_active_mask;
	dest_cpu = cpumask_any_and_distribute(cpu_valid_mask, new_mask);
	if (dest_cpu >= nr_cpu_ids) {
		ret = -EINVAL;
		goto out;
	}
	....
}


> 
>> 	Can we use cpus_read_lock()/cpus_read_unlock() to guarantee that set_cpus_allowed_ptr()
>> doesn't fail, as follows:
> 
> I'm wondering what can be wrong with the current actors:
> 
>     cpuset_can_attach
>       down_read(cpuset_rwsem)
>         // check all migratees
>       up_read(cpuset_rwsem)
>                                       [ _cpu_down / cpuhp_setup_state ]
>                                       schedule_work
>                                       ...
>                                       cpuset_hotplug_update_tasks
>                                         down_write(cpuset_rwsem)
>                                         up_write(cpuset_rwsem)
>                                       ... flush_work
>                                       [ _cpu_down / cpu_up_down_serialize_trainwrecks ]
>     cpuset_attach
>       down_write(cpuset_rwsem)
>         set_cpus_allowed_ptr(allowed_cpus_weird)
>       up_write(cpuset_rwsem)
> 

i think the troublesome scenario as follows:
     cpuset_can_attach
       down_read(cpuset_rwsem)
         // check all migratees
       up_read(cpuset_rwsem)
                                       			[ _cpu_down / cpuhp_setup_state ]
     cpuset_attach
      	down_write(cpuset_rwsem)
	guarantee_online_cpus() // (load cpus_attach)
	     						sched_cpu_deactivate
							  set_cpu_active(cpu, false)  // will change cpu_active_mask
        set_cpus_allowed_ptr(cpus_attach)
	   __set_cpus_allowed_ptr_locked()
	     // (if the intersection of cpus_attach and
	      cpu_active_mask is empty, will return -EINVAL)
       up_write(cpuset_rwsem)
	                                     		schedule_work
        	                               		...
                	                       		cpuset_hotplug_update_tasks
                        	                	 down_write(cpuset_rwsem)
	                                	         up_write(cpuset_rwsem)
		                                       ... flush_work
        		                               [ _cpu_down / cpu_up_down_serialize_trainwrecks ]


Regards,
Qiao

> The statement in cpuset_attach() about cpuset_can_attach() test is not
> so strong since task_can_attach() is mostly a pass for non-deadline
> tasks. Still, the use of cpuset_rwsem above should synchronize (I may be
> mistaken) the changes of cpuset's cpu masks, so I'd be interested about
> the details above to understand why the current approach doesn't work.
> 
> The additional cpus_read_{,un}lock (when reordered wrt cpuset_rwsem)
> may work but your patch should explain why (in what situation).
> 
> My .02€,
> Michal
> .
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Zhang Qiao <zhangqiao22-hv44wF8Li93QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
To: "Michal Koutný" <mkoutny-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	lizefan.x-EC8Uxl6Npydl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org,
	hannes-druUgvl0LCNAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org,
	cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [Question] set_cpus_allowed_ptr() call failed at cpuset_attach()
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:14:22 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ff49c096-39d9-4215-5b4f-8af2fd7c0c91@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220119130221.GA31037-9OudH3eul5jcvrawFnH+a6VXKuFTiq87@public.gmane.org>

hello

在 2022/1/19 21:02, Michal Koutný 写道:
> On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 09:15:06AM +0800, Zhang Qiao <zhangqiao22-hv44wF8Li93QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> 	I found the following warning log on qemu. I migrated a task from one cpuset cgroup to
>> another, while I also performed the cpu hotplug operation, and got following calltrace.
> 
> Do you have more information on what hotplug event and what error
> (from set_cpus_allowed_ptr() you observe? (And what's src/dst cpuset wrt
> root/non-root)?
  I ran the LTP testcases and a test scripts that do hotplug on a random cpu at the same time.
  The race condition quickly, and I can't reproduce it so far.
  By reading code about set_cpus_allowed_ptr(), i think __set_cpus_allowed_ptr_locked() will
be failed when new_mask and cpu_active_mask do not intersect, as follows:

 __set_cpus_allowed_ptr_locked():
	....
	const struct cpumask *cpu_valid_mask = cpu_active_mask;
	dest_cpu = cpumask_any_and_distribute(cpu_valid_mask, new_mask);
	if (dest_cpu >= nr_cpu_ids) {
		ret = -EINVAL;
		goto out;
	}
	....
}


> 
>> 	Can we use cpus_read_lock()/cpus_read_unlock() to guarantee that set_cpus_allowed_ptr()
>> doesn't fail, as follows:
> 
> I'm wondering what can be wrong with the current actors:
> 
>     cpuset_can_attach
>       down_read(cpuset_rwsem)
>         // check all migratees
>       up_read(cpuset_rwsem)
>                                       [ _cpu_down / cpuhp_setup_state ]
>                                       schedule_work
>                                       ...
>                                       cpuset_hotplug_update_tasks
>                                         down_write(cpuset_rwsem)
>                                         up_write(cpuset_rwsem)
>                                       ... flush_work
>                                       [ _cpu_down / cpu_up_down_serialize_trainwrecks ]
>     cpuset_attach
>       down_write(cpuset_rwsem)
>         set_cpus_allowed_ptr(allowed_cpus_weird)
>       up_write(cpuset_rwsem)
> 

i think the troublesome scenario as follows:
     cpuset_can_attach
       down_read(cpuset_rwsem)
         // check all migratees
       up_read(cpuset_rwsem)
                                       			[ _cpu_down / cpuhp_setup_state ]
     cpuset_attach
      	down_write(cpuset_rwsem)
	guarantee_online_cpus() // (load cpus_attach)
	     						sched_cpu_deactivate
							  set_cpu_active(cpu, false)  // will change cpu_active_mask
        set_cpus_allowed_ptr(cpus_attach)
	   __set_cpus_allowed_ptr_locked()
	     // (if the intersection of cpus_attach and
	      cpu_active_mask is empty, will return -EINVAL)
       up_write(cpuset_rwsem)
	                                     		schedule_work
        	                               		...
                	                       		cpuset_hotplug_update_tasks
                        	                	 down_write(cpuset_rwsem)
	                                	         up_write(cpuset_rwsem)
		                                       ... flush_work
        		                               [ _cpu_down / cpu_up_down_serialize_trainwrecks ]


Regards,
Qiao

> The statement in cpuset_attach() about cpuset_can_attach() test is not
> so strong since task_can_attach() is mostly a pass for non-deadline
> tasks. Still, the use of cpuset_rwsem above should synchronize (I may be
> mistaken) the changes of cpuset's cpu masks, so I'd be interested about
> the details above to understand why the current approach doesn't work.
> 
> The additional cpus_read_{,un}lock (when reordered wrt cpuset_rwsem)
> may work but your patch should explain why (in what situation).
> 
> My .02€,
> Michal
> .
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2022-01-20  7:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <09ce5796-798e-83d0-f1a6-ba38a787bfc5@huawei.com>
2022-01-14  1:15 ` [Question] set_cpus_allowed_ptr() call failed at cpuset_attach() Zhang Qiao
2022-01-14  1:15   ` Zhang Qiao
2022-01-14 16:20   ` Tejun Heo
2022-01-14 16:20     ` Tejun Heo
2022-01-14 20:33     ` Waiman Long
2022-01-14 20:33       ` Waiman Long
2022-01-17  2:25       ` Zhang Qiao
2022-01-17  2:25         ` Zhang Qiao
2022-01-17  4:35         ` Waiman Long
2022-01-17  4:35           ` Waiman Long
2022-01-17  6:27           ` Zhang Qiao
2022-01-17  6:27             ` Zhang Qiao
2022-01-17  6:25     ` Zhang Qiao
2022-01-17  6:25       ` Zhang Qiao
2022-01-19 13:02   ` Michal Koutný
2022-01-19 13:02     ` Michal Koutný
2022-01-20  7:14     ` Zhang Qiao [this message]
2022-01-20  7:14       ` Zhang Qiao
2022-01-20 14:02       ` Michal Koutný
2022-01-21  8:33         ` Zhang Qiao
2022-01-21  8:33           ` Zhang Qiao

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=ff49c096-39d9-4215-5b4f-8af2fd7c0c91@huawei.com \
    --to=zhangqiao22@huawei.com \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lizefan.x@bytedance.com \
    --cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
    --cc=tj@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: link
Be 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.