linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>
To: Mathias Krause <minipli@grsecurity.net>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
	Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Odin Ugedal <odin@uged.al>,
	Kevin Tanguy <kevin.tanguy@corp.ovh.com>,
	Brad Spengler <spender@grsecurity.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Prevent dead task groups from regaining cfs_rq's
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2021 19:49:39 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211104184939.GA23576@blackbody.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211103190613.3595047-1-minipli@grsecurity.net>

Hi.

On Wed, Nov 03, 2021 at 08:06:13PM +0100, Mathias Krause <minipli@grsecurity.net> wrote:
> When unregister_fair_sched_group() unlinks all cfs_rq's from the dying
> task group, it doesn't protect itself from getting interrupted. If the
> timer interrupt triggers while we iterate over all CPUs or after
> unregister_fair_sched_group() has finished but prior to unlinking the
> task group, sched_cfs_period_timer() will execute and walk the list of
> task groups, trying to unthrottle cfs_rq's, i.e. re-add them to the
> dying task group. These will later -- in free_fair_sched_group() -- be
> kfree()'ed while still being linked, leading to the fireworks Kevin and
> Michal are seeing.

[...]
 
>     CPU1:                                      CPU2:
>       :                                        timer IRQ:
>       :                                          do_sched_cfs_period_timer():
>       :                                            :
>       :                                            distribute_cfs_runtime():
>       :                                              rcu_read_lock();
>       :                                              :
>       :                                              unthrottle_cfs_rq():
>     sched_offline_group():                             :
>       :                                                walk_tg_tree_from(…,tg_unthrottle_up,…):
>       list_del_rcu(&tg->list);                           :
>  (1)  :                                                  list_for_each_entry_rcu(child, &parent->children, siblings)
>       :                                                    :
>  (2)  list_del_rcu(&tg->siblings);                         :
>       :                                                    tg_unthrottle_up():
>       unregister_fair_sched_group():                         struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq = tg->cfs_rq[cpu_of(rq)];
>         :                                                    :
>         list_del_leaf_cfs_rq(tg->cfs_rq[cpu]);               :
>         :                                                    :
>         :                                                    if (!cfs_rq_is_decayed(cfs_rq) || cfs_rq->nr_running)
>  (3)    :                                                        list_add_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
>       :                                                      :
>       :                                                    :
>       :                                                  :
>       :                                                :
>       :                                              :
>  (4)  :                                              rcu_read_unlock();

The list traversal (1) may happen in some scenarios (quota on non-leaf
task_group) but in the presented reproducer, the quota is set on the
leaf task_group. That means it has no children and this list iteration
is irrelevant.
The cause is that walk_tg_tree_from includes `from` task_group and
calls tg_unthrottle_up() on it too.
What I mean is that the unlinking of tg->list and tg->siblings is
irrelevant in this case.

The timer can still fire after
sched_offline_group()/unregister_fair_sched_group() finished (i.e. after
synchronize_rcu())


> This patch survives Michal's reproducer[2] for 8h+ now, which used to
> trigger within minutes before.

Note that the reproducer is sensitive to the sleep between last task
exit and cgroup rmdir. I assume that the added synchronize_rcu() before
list_del_leaf_cfs_rq() shifted the list removal after the last timer
callback and prevented re-adding of the offlined task_group in
unthrottle_cfs_rq().

(Of course, it'd more convincing if I backed this theory by results from
the reproducer with the increased interval to crash again. I may get
down to that later.)

Does your patch fix the crashes also in your real workload?

Michal

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-11-04 18:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-10-11 17:22 [PATCH] sched/fair: Use rq->lock when checking cfs_rq list presence Michal Koutný
2021-10-11 19:12 ` Odin Ugedal
2021-10-12 18:32   ` Tao Zhou
2021-10-13 18:52     ` Odin Ugedal
2021-10-13 14:39   ` Michal Koutný
2021-10-13 18:45     ` Odin Ugedal
2021-10-13  7:57 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-10-13 14:26   ` Michal Koutný
2021-11-02 16:02     ` task_group unthrottling and removal race (was Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Use rq->lock when checking cfs_rq list) presence Michal Koutný
2021-11-02 20:20       ` Odin Ugedal
2021-11-03  9:51       ` Mathias Krause
2021-11-03 10:51         ` Mathias Krause
2021-11-03 11:10           ` Michal Koutný
2021-11-03 14:16             ` Mathias Krause
2021-11-03 19:06               ` [PATCH] sched/fair: Prevent dead task groups from regaining cfs_rq's Mathias Krause
2021-11-03 22:03                 ` Benjamin Segall
2021-11-04  8:50                   ` Vincent Guittot
2021-11-04 15:13                     ` Mathias Krause
2021-11-04 16:49                       ` Vincent Guittot
2021-11-04 17:37                         ` Mathias Krause
2021-11-05 14:25                           ` Vincent Guittot
2021-11-05 14:44                             ` Mathias Krause
2021-11-05 16:29                               ` Mathias Krause
2021-11-05 16:58                                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-11-05 17:14                                   ` Mathias Krause
2021-11-05 17:27                                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-11-05 17:40                                       ` Mathias Krause
2021-11-06 10:48                                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-11-08 10:27                                   ` Mathias Krause
2021-11-08 11:40                                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-11-08 15:06                                       ` Mathias Krause
2021-11-10 15:14                                         ` Vincent Guittot
2021-11-09 18:47                                       ` Michal Koutný
2021-11-10 15:17                                         ` Vincent Guittot
2021-11-04 20:46                       ` Benjamin Segall
2021-11-04 18:49                 ` Michal Koutný [this message]
2021-11-05 14:55                   ` Mathias Krause
2021-11-05 14:58                 ` Peter Zijlstra

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=20211104184939.GA23576@blackbody.suse.cz \
    --to=mkoutny@suse.com \
    --cc=bristot@redhat.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=kevin.tanguy@corp.ovh.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=minipli@grsecurity.net \
    --cc=odin@uged.al \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=spender@grsecurity.net \
    --cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).