[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20211026141055.57358-2-frederic@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2021 16:10:54 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Hasegawa Hitomi <hasegawa-hitomi@...itsu.com>
Subject: [PATCH 1/2 RESEND] timers/nohz: Last resort update jiffies on nohz_full IRQ entry
When at least one CPU runs in nohz_full mode, a dedicated timekeeper CPU
is guaranteed to stay online and to never stop its tick.
Meanwhile on some rare case, the dedicated timekeeper may be running
with interrupts disabled for a while, such as in stop_machine.
If jiffies stop being updated, a nohz_full CPU may end up endlessly
programming the next tick in the past, taking the last jiffies update
monotonic timestamp as a stale base, resulting in an tick storm.
Here is a scenario where it matters:
0) CPU 0 is the timekeeper and CPU 1 a nohz_full CPU.
1) A stop machine callback is queued to execute somewhere.
2) CPU 0 reaches MULTI_STOP_DISABLE_IRQ while CPU 1 is still in
MULTI_STOP_PREPARE. Hence CPU 0 can't do its timekeeping duty. CPU 1
can still take IRQs.
3) CPU 1 receives an IRQ which queues a timer callback one jiffy forward.
4) On IRQ exit, CPU 1 schedules the tick one jiffy forward, taking
last_jiffies_update as a base. But last_jiffies_update hasn't been
updated for 2 jiffies since the timekeeper has interrupts disabled.
5) clockevents_program_event(), which relies on ktime_get(), observes
that the expiration is in the past and therefore programs the min
delta event on the clock.
6) The tick fires immediately, goto 3)
7) Tick storm, the nohz_full CPU is drown and takes ages to reach
MULTI_STOP_DISABLE_IRQ, which is the only way out of this situation.
Solve this with unconditionally updating jiffies if the value is stale
on nohz_full IRQ entry. IRQs and other disturbances are expected to be
rare enough on nohz_full for the unconditional call to ktime_get() to
actually matter.
Reported-and-tested-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
---
kernel/softirq.c | 3 ++-
kernel/time/tick-sched.c | 7 +++++++
2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/softirq.c b/kernel/softirq.c
index 322b65d45676..41f470929e99 100644
--- a/kernel/softirq.c
+++ b/kernel/softirq.c
@@ -595,7 +595,8 @@ void irq_enter_rcu(void)
{
__irq_enter_raw();
- if (is_idle_task(current) && (irq_count() == HARDIRQ_OFFSET))
+ if (tick_nohz_full_cpu(smp_processor_id()) ||
+ (is_idle_task(current) && (irq_count() == HARDIRQ_OFFSET)))
tick_irq_enter();
account_hardirq_enter(current);
diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
index 6bffe5af8cb1..17a283ce2b20 100644
--- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
+++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
@@ -1375,6 +1375,13 @@ static inline void tick_nohz_irq_enter(void)
now = ktime_get();
if (ts->idle_active)
tick_nohz_stop_idle(ts, now);
+ /*
+ * If all CPUs are idle. We may need to update a stale jiffies value.
+ * Note nohz_full is a special case: a timekeeper is guaranteed to stay
+ * alive but it might be busy looping with interrupts disabled in some
+ * rare case (typically stop machine). So we must make sure we have a
+ * last resort.
+ */
if (ts->tick_stopped)
tick_nohz_update_jiffies(now);
}
--
2.25.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists