Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Use rq->lock when checking cfs_rq list presence
From: Tao Zhou
Date: Tue Oct 12 2021 - 14:50:37 EST
Hi Odin,
On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 08:12:08PM +0100, Odin Ugedal wrote:
> man. 11. okt. 2021 kl. 18:24 skrev Michal Koutný <mkoutny@xxxxxxxx>:
> >
> > The removal path checks cfs_rq->on_list flag without synchronization
> > based on the reasoning that only empty cgroups can be removed and
> > ->on_list can't switch back to 1. However, since the commit a7b359fc6a37
> > ("sched/fair: Correctly insert cfs_rq's to list on unthrottle") even
> > cfs_rq of an empty cgroup may be added to the list because of
> > non-decayed load that transiently remains there.
> > The result is that we may skip unlinking the cfs_rq from the list on the
> > removal path and the list will then contain free'd cfs_rq, which leads
> > sooner or later to a task failing inside update_blocked_averages while
> > holding rq->lock and eventually locking up the machine on all other CPUs
> > as well:
> >
> > [ 8995.095798] BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000080
> > [ 9016.281685] NMI watchdog: Watchdog detected hard LOCKUP on cpu 21
> >
> > Illustrative stack dump of a task that faulted by accessing released
> > cfs_rq (+unrelated deadlock on rq->lock):
> >
> > PID: 0 TASK: ffff8a310a5dc000 CPU: 16 COMMAND: "swapper/16"
> > #0 [fffffe0000379e58] crash_nmi_callback at ffffffffba063683
> > #1 [fffffe0000379e60] nmi_handle at ffffffffba0377ef
> > #2 [fffffe0000379eb8] default_do_nmi at ffffffffba037c5e
> > #3 [fffffe0000379ed8] do_nmi at ffffffffba037ea7
> > #4 [fffffe0000379ef0] end_repeat_nmi at ffffffffbaa0178b
> > [exception RIP: native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath+98]
> > RIP: ffffffffba0fa6e2 RSP: ffffa8505932ca30 RFLAGS: 00000002
> > RAX: 0000000001200101 RBX: ffff8a8de9044000 RCX: ffff8a8ec0800000
> > RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: ffff8a8ec082cc80
> > RBP: ffff8a8ec082cc80 R8: ffff8a8ec0800000 R9: ffff8a31078058f8
> > R10: 0000000000000000 R11: ffffffffbb4639d8 R12: 0000000000000000
> > R13: ffff8a8de9044b84 R14: 0000000000000006 R15: 0000000000000010
> > ORIG_RAX: ffffffffffffffff CS: 0010 SS: 0018
> > --- <NMI exception stack> ---
> > #5 [ffffa8505932ca30] native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath at ffffffffba0fa6e2
> > #6 [ffffa8505932ca30] _raw_spin_lock at ffffffffba922aab
> > #7 [ffffa8505932ca38] try_to_wake_up at ffffffffba0cf8f9
> > #8 [ffffa8505932ca98] __queue_work at ffffffffba0b9c7e
> > #9 [ffffa8505932cae0] queue_work_on at ffffffffba0ba7b4
> > #10 [ffffa8505932caf0] bit_putcs at ffffffffba541bc0
> > #11 [ffffa8505932cbf0] fbcon_putcs at ffffffffba53c36b
> > #12 [ffffa8505932cc48] vt_console_print at ffffffffba5ff032
> > #13 [ffffa8505932cca8] console_unlock at ffffffffba1091a2
> > #14 [ffffa8505932ccf0] vprintk_emit at ffffffffba10ad29
> > #15 [ffffa8505932cd40] printk at ffffffffba10b590
> > #16 [ffffa8505932cda8] no_context at ffffffffba081f66
> > #17 [ffffa8505932ce10] do_page_fault at ffffffffba082df0
> > #18 [ffffa8505932ce40] page_fault at ffffffffbaa012fe
> > [exception RIP: update_blocked_averages+685]
> > RIP: ffffffffba0d85cd RSP: ffffa8505932cef0 RFLAGS: 00010046
> > RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff8a8ca0510000 RCX: 0000000000000000
> > RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffff8a8ca0510000 RDI: 0000000000000000
> > RBP: 0000000000000000 R8: 00000000eac0c6e6 R9: 0000000000000233
> > R10: ffffa8505932cef0 R11: 0000000000000233 R12: ffff8a8ca0510140
> > R13: 0000000000000000 R14: fffffffffffffec2 R15: 0000000000000080
> > ORIG_RAX: ffffffffffffffff CS: 0010 SS: 0018
> > #19 [ffffa8505932cf50] run_rebalance_domains at ffffffffba0e2751
> > #20 [ffffa8505932cf68] __softirqentry_text_start at ffffffffbac000e3
> > #21 [ffffa8505932cfc8] irq_exit at ffffffffba0a2cf5
> > #22 [ffffa8505932cfd8] smp_apic_timer_interrupt at ffffffffbaa02874
> > #23 [ffffa8505932cff0] apic_timer_interrupt at ffffffffbaa01d9f
> > --- <IRQ stack> ---
> > #24 [ffffa850402f3dd8] apic_timer_interrupt at ffffffffbaa01d9f
> > [exception RIP: cpuidle_enter_state+171]
> > RIP: ffffffffba6fc32b RSP: ffffa850402f3e80 RFLAGS: 00000246
> > RAX: ffff8a8ec082cc80 RBX: ffffc7f053605e80 RCX: 000000000000001f
> > RDX: 0000082e557d390c RSI: 000000003d1877c2 RDI: 0000000000000000
> > RBP: ffffffffbb55f100 R8: 0000000000000002 R9: 000000000002c500
> > R10: ffffa850402f3e60 R11: 00000000000002ff R12: 0000000000000002
> > R13: 0000082e557d390c R14: 0000000000000002 R15: 0000000000000000
> > ORIG_RAX: ffffffffffffff13 CS: 0010 SS: 0018
> > #25 [ffffa850402f3ec0] cpuidle_enter at ffffffffba6fc6f9
> > #26 [ffffa850402f3ee0] do_idle at ffffffffba0d4567
> > #27 [ffffa850402f3f20] cpu_startup_entry at ffffffffba0d4769
> > #28 [ffffa850402f3f30] start_secondary at ffffffffba064e35
> > #29 [ffffa850402f3f50] secondary_startup_64_no_verify at ffffffffba000112
> >
> > Fix this by always taking rq->lock when checking the ->on_list condition
> > (the modification of the list in UBA is therefore synchronized).
>
> Hi,
>
> Well, yeah, that statement (in the code you removed) does not hold any more,
> that is definitely true. Good catch.
>
> To be 100% clear, this can only happen when a control group is
> throttled while it has load
> (cfs_rq_is_decayed(cfs_rq) is false); and then its unthrottling race
> with its deletion?
> Is that a correct understanding Michal?
>
> >
> > Taking the rq->lock on every cpu cgroup removal may pose a performance
> > penalty. However, this should be just moving the necessary work from UBA
> > into the unregister_fair_sched_group() and therefore neutral on larger
> > scale (assuming given cpu cgroup was populated at least once).
> >
> > Fixes: a7b359fc6a37 ("sched/fair: Correctly insert cfs_rq's to list on unthrottle")
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@xxxxxxxx>
> > ---
>
> Others know more about the performance impact of that lock, but in
> terms of logic,
> it looks good to me. Fixing it the other way around, without
> reintroducing the issue fixed in
> a7b359fc6a37 ("sched/fair: Correctly insert cfs_rq's to list on
> unthrottle"), would create even
> more brittle logic I think. fdaba61ef8a26 ("sched/fair: Ensure that
> the CFS parent is added
> after unthrottling) will also complicate that even more (and that
> patch is also needed for
> correcting the issues it does.
>
> In theory, we can do something like the diff below (from the
> top of my head), but I'm not sure if I am 100% comfortable with such a solution.
> Especially due to the "child_cfs_rq_on_list(cfs_rq)" we need in addition
> to the nr_running. Do you agree that that will also solve the problem Michal,
> or am I missing something obvious here?
>
> I do think Vincent might have some more thoughts about this, so I will
> defer it to him.
>
> So in general, given that the locking thing is ok:
> Acked-by: Odin Ugedal <odin@xxxxxxx>
>
> Thanks
> Odin
>
> [0]:
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index f6a05d9b5443..e9a104d57b59 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -4805,9 +4805,13 @@ static int tg_unthrottle_up(struct task_group
> *tg, void *data)
> cfs_rq->throttled_clock_task_time += rq_clock_task(rq) -
> cfs_rq->throttled_clock_task;
>
> - /* Add cfs_rq with load or one or more already running
> entities to the list */
> - if (!cfs_rq_is_decayed(cfs_rq) || cfs_rq->nr_running)
> + if (cfs_rq->nr_running || child_cfs_rq_on_list(cfs_rq)) {
> list_add_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
> + } else (!cfs_rq->on_list && !cfs_rq_is_decayed(cfs_rq)) {
> + // Fully decay/detach the load of the cfs_rq
> + cfs_rq->avg.load_avg = 0;
> + update_tg_load_avg(cfs_rq);
Er.. this is considered specific to this fix I think. Normal unthrottle(not
race with delete, avg maybe used in after) also need the normal avg decay.
> + }
> }
>
> return 0;
Thanks,
Tao