[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220331145343.GF17613@pauld.bos.csb>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2022 10:53:44 -0400
From: Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>
To: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arch/arm64: Fix topology initialization for core
scheduling
On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 04:37:50PM +0200 Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> On 31/03/2022 15:21, Phil Auld wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 11:04:31AM +0200 Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> >> On 30/03/2022 17:56, Phil Auld wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >> Ah, the reason is that smt_mask is not correctly setup, so we bail on
> >> `cpumask_weight(smt_mask) == 1` for !leaders in:
> >>
> >> notify_cpu_starting()
> >> cpuhp_invoke_callback_range()
> >> sched_cpu_starting()
> >> sched_core_cpu_starting()
> >>
> >> which leads to rq->core not being correctly set for !leader-rq's.
> >>
> >
> > Exactly, sorry I was not clearer. smt_mask must be setup correctly
> > by the time sched_core_cpu_starting() is called. (Maybe I should crib
> > some of the above lines into the commit message?)
>
> Yeah, maybe, it wouldn't hurt I guess. IMHO mentioning stress-ng's prctl
> needs PR_SCHED_CORE support could also be handy since today's stress-ng
> packages don't seem to have this yet.
>
My scripts clone it so I did not realize that was not in prepackaged versions
yet. But that said, that's really just a way to tickle the problem. Anyone
using core scheduling on such a system will hit this (at least the WARN part,
the actual crash was harder to create w/o all the threads and tasks stress-ng
uses).
I can send a v3 with a further commit message update.
Cheers,
Phil
--
Powered by blists - more mailing lists