[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211110104510.GB20566@blackbody.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2021 11:45:10 +0100
From: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Sultan Alsawaf <sultan@...neltoast.com>,
Anton Vorontsov <anton@...msg.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
Subject: Re: printk deadlock due to double lock attempt on current CPU's
runqueue
On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 10:00:35AM +0100, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org> wrote:
> Is it the same SCHED_WARN_ON(rq->tmp_alone_branch !=
> &rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list); that generates the deadlock on v5.15 too ?
>
> one remaining tmp_alone_branch warning has been fixed in v5.15 with
> 2630cde26711 ("sched/fair: Add ancestors of unthrottled undecayed cfs_rq")
AFAIK, the warning is typically triggered on v5.13 when CPU throttling is
employeed. The cfs_rq list is mis-ordered but it shouldn't be fatal.
But the throttling currently (since v5.13 too) also exposes a race on
task_group removal that can lead to corrupting the cfs_rq list (another
thread [1], I'll leave this thread for printk (non)-locking).
HTH,
Michal
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20211011172236.11223-1-mkoutny@suse.com/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists