diff options
author | Huaixin Chang <changhuaixin@linux.alibaba.com> | 2020-03-27 11:26:25 +0800 |
---|---|---|
committer | Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> | 2020-04-08 11:35:19 +0200 |
commit | 26a8b12747c975b33b4a82d62e4a307e1c07f31b (patch) | |
tree | 739ef3c1faefc47fdf361278277c504354f278f2 /kernel/sched/fair.c | |
parent | d76343c6b2b79f5e89c392bc9ce9dabc4c9e90cb (diff) |
sched/fair: Fix race between runtime distribution and assignment
Currently, there is a potential race between distribute_cfs_runtime()
and assign_cfs_rq_runtime(). Race happens when cfs_b->runtime is read,
distributes without holding lock and finds out there is not enough
runtime to charge against after distribution. Because
assign_cfs_rq_runtime() might be called during distribution, and use
cfs_b->runtime at the same time.
Fibtest is the tool to test this race. Assume all gcfs_rq is throttled
and cfs period timer runs, slow threads might run and sleep, returning
unused cfs_rq runtime and keeping min_cfs_rq_runtime in their local
pool. If all this happens sufficiently quickly, cfs_b->runtime will drop
a lot. If runtime distributed is large too, over-use of runtime happens.
A runtime over-using by about 70 percent of quota is seen when we
test fibtest on a 96-core machine. We run fibtest with 1 fast thread and
95 slow threads in test group, configure 10ms quota for this group and
see the CPU usage of fibtest is 17.0%, which is far more than the
expected 10%.
On a smaller machine with 32 cores, we also run fibtest with 96
threads. CPU usage is more than 12%, which is also more than expected
10%. This shows that on similar workloads, this race do affect CPU
bandwidth control.
Solve this by holding lock inside distribute_cfs_runtime().
Fixes: c06f04c70489 ("sched: Fix potential near-infinite distribute_cfs_runtime() loop")
Reviewed-by: Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Huaixin Chang <changhuaixin@linux.alibaba.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200325092602.22471-1-changhuaixin@linux.alibaba.com/
Diffstat (limited to 'kernel/sched/fair.c')
-rw-r--r-- | kernel/sched/fair.c | 31 |
1 files changed, 11 insertions, 20 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c index fb025e946f83..95cbd9e7958d 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c @@ -4836,11 +4836,10 @@ void unthrottle_cfs_rq(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq) resched_curr(rq); } -static u64 distribute_cfs_runtime(struct cfs_bandwidth *cfs_b, u64 remaining) +static void distribute_cfs_runtime(struct cfs_bandwidth *cfs_b) { struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq; - u64 runtime; - u64 starting_runtime = remaining; + u64 runtime, remaining = 1; rcu_read_lock(); list_for_each_entry_rcu(cfs_rq, &cfs_b->throttled_cfs_rq, @@ -4855,10 +4854,13 @@ static u64 distribute_cfs_runtime(struct cfs_bandwidth *cfs_b, u64 remaining) /* By the above check, this should never be true */ SCHED_WARN_ON(cfs_rq->runtime_remaining > 0); + raw_spin_lock(&cfs_b->lock); runtime = -cfs_rq->runtime_remaining + 1; - if (runtime > remaining) - runtime = remaining; - remaining -= runtime; + if (runtime > cfs_b->runtime) + runtime = cfs_b->runtime; + cfs_b->runtime -= runtime; + remaining = cfs_b->runtime; + raw_spin_unlock(&cfs_b->lock); cfs_rq->runtime_remaining += runtime; @@ -4873,8 +4875,6 @@ next: break; } rcu_read_unlock(); - - return starting_runtime - remaining; } /* @@ -4885,7 +4885,6 @@ next: */ static int do_sched_cfs_period_timer(struct cfs_bandwidth *cfs_b, int overrun, unsigned long flags) { - u64 runtime; int throttled; /* no need to continue the timer with no bandwidth constraint */ @@ -4914,24 +4913,17 @@ static int do_sched_cfs_period_timer(struct cfs_bandwidth *cfs_b, int overrun, u cfs_b->nr_throttled += overrun; /* - * This check is repeated as we are holding onto the new bandwidth while - * we unthrottle. This can potentially race with an unthrottled group - * trying to acquire new bandwidth from the global pool. This can result - * in us over-using our runtime if it is all used during this loop, but - * only by limited amounts in that extreme case. + * This check is repeated as we release cfs_b->lock while we unthrottle. */ while (throttled && cfs_b->runtime > 0 && !cfs_b->distribute_running) { - runtime = cfs_b->runtime; cfs_b->distribute_running = 1; raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cfs_b->lock, flags); /* we can't nest cfs_b->lock while distributing bandwidth */ - runtime = distribute_cfs_runtime(cfs_b, runtime); + distribute_cfs_runtime(cfs_b); raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&cfs_b->lock, flags); cfs_b->distribute_running = 0; throttled = !list_empty(&cfs_b->throttled_cfs_rq); - - lsub_positive(&cfs_b->runtime, runtime); } /* @@ -5065,10 +5057,9 @@ static void do_sched_cfs_slack_timer(struct cfs_bandwidth *cfs_b) if (!runtime) return; - runtime = distribute_cfs_runtime(cfs_b, runtime); + distribute_cfs_runtime(cfs_b); raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&cfs_b->lock, flags); - lsub_positive(&cfs_b->runtime, runtime); cfs_b->distribute_running = 0; raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cfs_b->lock, flags); } |