linux-kernel - [patch v2] mm: lru_cache_disable: replace work queue synchronization with synchronize

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YhUI1wUtV8yguijO@fuller.cnet>
Date:   Tue, 22 Feb 2022 13:01:27 -0300
From:   Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenzju@...hat.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Subject: [patch v2] mm: lru_cache_disable: replace work queue synchronization
 with synchronize_rcu


On systems that run FIFO:1 applications that busy loop 
on isolated CPUs, executing tasks on such CPUs under
lower priority is undesired (since that will either
hang the system, or cause longer interruption to the
FIFO task due to execution of lower priority task 
with very small sched slices).

Commit d479960e44f27e0e52ba31b21740b703c538027c ("mm: disable LRU 
pagevec during the migration temporarily") relies on 
queueing work items on all online CPUs to ensure visibility
of lru_disable_count.

However, its possible to use synchronize_rcu which will provide the same
guarantees:

    * synchronize_rcu() waits for preemption disabled
    * and RCU read side critical sections
    * For the users of lru_disable_count:
    *
    * preempt_disable, local_irq_disable() [bh_lru_lock()]
    * rcu_read_lock                        [lru_pvecs CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT]
    * preempt_disable                      [lru_pvecs !CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT]
    *
    *
    * so any calls of lru_cache_disabled wrapped by
    * local_lock+rcu_read_lock or preemption disabled would be
    * ordered by that. 

Fixes:

[ 1873.243925] INFO: task kworker/u160:0:9 blocked for more than 622 seconds.
[ 1873.243927]       Tainted: G          I      --------- ---  5.14.0-31.rt21.31.el9.x86_64 #1
[ 1873.243929] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
[ 1873.243929] task:kworker/u160:0  state:D stack:    0 pid:    9 ppid:     2 flags:0x00004000
[ 1873.243932] Workqueue: cpuset_migrate_mm cpuset_migrate_mm_workfn
[ 1873.243936] Call Trace:
[ 1873.243938]  __schedule+0x21b/0x5b0
[ 1873.243941]  schedule+0x43/0xe0
[ 1873.243943]  schedule_timeout+0x14d/0x190
[ 1873.243946]  ? resched_curr+0x20/0xe0
[ 1873.243953]  ? __prepare_to_swait+0x4b/0x70
[ 1873.243958]  wait_for_completion+0x84/0xe0
[ 1873.243962]  __flush_work.isra.0+0x146/0x200
[ 1873.243966]  ? flush_workqueue_prep_pwqs+0x130/0x130
[ 1873.243971]  __lru_add_drain_all+0x158/0x1f0
[ 1873.243978]  do_migrate_pages+0x3d/0x2d0
[ 1873.243985]  ? pick_next_task_fair+0x39/0x3b0
[ 1873.243989]  ? put_prev_task_fair+0x1e/0x30
[ 1873.243992]  ? pick_next_task+0xb30/0xbd0
[ 1873.243995]  ? __tick_nohz_task_switch+0x1e/0x70
[ 1873.244000]  ? raw_spin_rq_unlock+0x18/0x60
[ 1873.244002]  ? finish_task_switch.isra.0+0xc1/0x2d0
[ 1873.244005]  ? __switch_to+0x12f/0x510
[ 1873.244013]  cpuset_migrate_mm_workfn+0x22/0x40
[ 1873.244016]  process_one_work+0x1e0/0x410
[ 1873.244019]  worker_thread+0x50/0x3b0
[ 1873.244022]  ? process_one_work+0x410/0x410
[ 1873.244024]  kthread+0x173/0x190
[ 1873.244027]  ? set_kthread_struct+0x40/0x40
[ 1873.244031]  ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30

Signed-off-by: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>

v2: rt_spin_lock calls rcu_read_lock, no need
to add it before local_lock on swap.c		(Nicolas Saenz Julienne) 

diff --git a/mm/swap.c b/mm/swap.c
index bcf3ac288b56..48299a125d68 100644
--- a/mm/swap.c
+++ b/mm/swap.c
@@ -831,8 +831,7 @@ inline void __lru_add_drain_all(bool force_all_cpus)
 	for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
 		struct work_struct *work = &per_cpu(lru_add_drain_work, cpu);
 
-		if (force_all_cpus ||
-		    pagevec_count(&per_cpu(lru_pvecs.lru_add, cpu)) ||
+		if (pagevec_count(&per_cpu(lru_pvecs.lru_add, cpu)) ||
 		    data_race(pagevec_count(&per_cpu(lru_rotate.pvec, cpu))) ||
 		    pagevec_count(&per_cpu(lru_pvecs.lru_deactivate_file, cpu)) ||
 		    pagevec_count(&per_cpu(lru_pvecs.lru_deactivate, cpu)) ||
@@ -876,14 +875,21 @@ atomic_t lru_disable_count = ATOMIC_INIT(0);
 void lru_cache_disable(void)
 {
 	atomic_inc(&lru_disable_count);
+	synchronize_rcu();
 #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
 	/*
-	 * lru_add_drain_all in the force mode will schedule draining on
-	 * all online CPUs so any calls of lru_cache_disabled wrapped by
-	 * local_lock or preemption disabled would be ordered by that.
-	 * The atomic operation doesn't need to have stronger ordering
-	 * requirements because that is enforced by the scheduling
-	 * guarantees.
+	 * synchronize_rcu() waits for preemption disabled
+	 * and RCU read side critical sections.
+	 * For the users of lru_disable_count:
+	 *
+	 * preempt_disable, local_irq_disable  [bh_lru_lock()]
+	 * rcu_read_lock		       [rt_spin_lock CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT]
+	 * preempt_disable		       [local_lock !CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT]
+	 *
+	 * so any calls of lru_cache_disabled wrapped by local_lock or
+	 * preemption disabled would be ordered by that. The atomic
+	 * operation doesn't need to have stronger ordering requirements
+	 * because that is enforced by the scheduling guarantees.
 	 */
 	__lru_add_drain_all(true);
 #else