[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b391cf82-8290-5c8f-b5c7-b355ba9e6ce8@codeaurora.org>
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 12:33:48 -0600
From: Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@...eaurora.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Austin Christ <austinwc@...eaurora.org>,
Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@...eaurora.org>,
Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/2] sched/fair: Fix load_balance() affinity redo path
On 6/5/2017 11:23 AM, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
> On 6/2/2017 4:27 PM, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> index d711093..84255ab 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> @@ -6737,10 +6737,10 @@ int can_migrate_task(struct task_struct *p,
>> struct lb_env *env)
>> * our sched_group. We may want to revisit it if we couldn't
>> * meet load balance goals by pulling other tasks on src_cpu.
>> *
>> - * Also avoid computing new_dst_cpu if we have already computed
>> - * one in current iteration.
>> + * Avoid computing new_dst_cpu for NEWLY_IDLE or if we have
>> + * already computed one in current iteration.
>> */
>> - if (!env->dst_grpmask || (env->flags & LBF_DST_PINNED))
>> + if (env->idle == CPU_NEWLY_IDLE || (env->flags &
>> LBF_DST_PINNED))
>> return 0;
>
> Self NACK. This breaks active_load_balance_cpu_stop(). Looks like
> env->idle == CPU_IDLE, but env->dst_grpmask is uninitialized, so it can
> be NULL, which causes a null pointer dereference a few lines later.
>
> I'm still having a look to see what makes sense to address the issue.
>
>
As far as I can see, there appears to be two options to resolve the issue -
1. Update active_load_balance_cpu_stop() to initialize dst_grpmask to a
sane value
2. Undo the proposed changes in load_balance() to "ensure" dst_grpmask
is valid, and calculate the value on demand when checking to see if the
redo path needs to be done.
The downside to #1 is that dst_grpmask is not needed in the
active_load_balance_cpu_stop() path, and the loop to calculate a new
dst_cpu will be used. Extra code is evaluated, but there appears to be
no side effects.
The downside to #2 is that dst_grpmask is valid the majority of the time
in load_balance(), so calculating it on demand is redundant most of the
time, but again there appears to be no side effects.
It somewhat feels like a choice of which option is less bad.
Peter/Dietmar, any preferences?
--
Jeffrey Hugo
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies as an affiliate of Qualcomm
Technologies, Inc.
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the
Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists