[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180420152726.GJ24599@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 17:27:26 +0200
From: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...il.com>
To: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched/rt: Rework for_each_process_thread() iterations
in tg_has_rt_tasks()
On 20/04/18 17:30, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
> On 20.04.2018 17:11, Juri Lelli wrote:
> > On 20/04/18 13:06, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
> >> From: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com>
> >>
> >> tg_rt_schedulable() iterates over all child task groups,
> >> while tg_has_rt_tasks() iterates over all linked tasks.
> >> In case of systems with big number of tasks, this may
> >> take a lot of time.
> >>
> >> I observed hard LOCKUP on machine with 20000+ processes
> >> after write to "cpu.rt_period_us" of cpu cgroup with
> >> 39 children. The problem occurred because of tasklist_lock
> >> is held for a long time and other processes can't do fork().
> >>
> >> PID: 1036268 TASK: ffff88766c310000 CPU: 36 COMMAND: "criu"
> >> #0 [ffff887f7f408e48] crash_nmi_callback at ffffffff81050601
> >> #1 [ffff887f7f408e58] nmi_handle at ffffffff816e0cc7
> >> #2 [ffff887f7f408eb0] do_nmi at ffffffff816e0fb0
> >> #3 [ffff887f7f408ef0] end_repeat_nmi at ffffffff816e00b9
> >> [exception RIP: tg_rt_schedulable+463]
> >> RIP: ffffffff810bf49f RSP: ffff886537ad7d50 RFLAGS: 00000202
> >> RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 000000003b9aca00 RCX: ffff883e9cb4b1b0
> >> RDX: ffff887d0be43608 RSI: ffff886537ad7dd8 RDI: ffff8840a6ad0000
> >> RBP: ffff886537ad7d68 R8: ffff887d0be431b0 R9: 00000000000e7ef0
> >> R10: ffff88164fc39400 R11: 0000000000023380 R12: ffffffff81ef8d00
> >> R13: ffffffff810bea40 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: ffff8840a6ad0000
> >> ORIG_RAX: ffffffffffffffff CS: 0010 SS: 0018
> >> --- <NMI exception stack> ---
> >> #4 [ffff886537ad7d50] tg_rt_schedulable at ffffffff810bf49f
> >> #5 [ffff886537ad7d70] walk_tg_tree_from at ffffffff810c6c91
> >> #6 [ffff886537ad7dc0] tg_set_rt_bandwidth at ffffffff810c6dd0
> >> #7 [ffff886537ad7e28] cpu_rt_period_write_uint at ffffffff810c6eea
> >> #8 [ffff886537ad7e38] cgroup_file_write at ffffffff8111cfd3
> >> #9 [ffff886537ad7ec8] vfs_write at ffffffff8121eced
> >> #10 [ffff886537ad7f08] sys_write at ffffffff8121faff
> >> #11 [ffff886537ad7f50] system_call_fastpath at ffffffff816e8a7d
> >>
> >> The patch reworks tg_has_rt_tasks() and makes it to iterate over
> >> task group process list instead of iteration over all tasks list.
> >> This makes the function to scale well, and reduces its execution
> >> time.
> >>
> >> Note, that since tasklist_lock doesn't protect a task against
> >> sched_class changing, we don't introduce new races in comparison
> >> to that we had before.
> >
> > This seems to be true. However, I wonder why we are OK with current racy
> > code (against tasks moving between groups). :/
> >
> > Can't a task join the group while we are iterating and we miss that?
>
> Yes, it can, but I'm not sure either this should be considered as problem,
> seeing the race design we already have. It's not a real protection, this
> place is to warn a person, he does something wrong. We check for zero written
> there, but really written "1" will invent the same problems.
Mmm, right. :/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists