[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f832a6bc-d0f2-b659-37c9-2b64f1e73b0d@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2023 11:13:28 -0500
From: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
libc-alpha@...rceware.org
Subject: Re: rseq CPU ID not correct on 6.0 kernels for pinned threads
On 1/13/23 11:06, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Mathieu Desnoyers:
>
>> On 2023-01-12 11:33, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>> * Mathieu Desnoyers:
>>>
>>>> As you also point out, it can also be caused by some other task
>>>> modifying the affinity of your task concurrently. You could print
>>>> the result of sched_getaffinity on error to get a better idea of
>>>> the expected vs actual mask.
>>>>
>>>> Lastly, it could be caused by CPU hotplug which would set all bits
>>>> in the affinity mask as a fallback. As you mention it should not be
>>>> the cause there.
>>>>
>>>> Can you share your kernel configuration ?
>>> Attached.
>>> cpupower frequency-info says:
>>> analyzing CPU 0:
>>> driver: intel_cpufreq
>>> CPUs which run at the same hardware frequency: 0
>>> CPUs which need to have their frequency coordinated by software: 0
>>> maximum transition latency: 20.0 us
>>> hardware limits: 800 MHz - 4.60 GHz
>>> available cpufreq governors: conservative ondemand userspace powersave performance schedutil
>>> current policy: frequency should be within 800 MHz and 4.60 GHz.
>>> The governor "schedutil" may decide which speed to use
>>> within this range.
>>> current CPU frequency: Unable to call hardware
>>> current CPU frequency: 3.20 GHz (asserted by call to kernel)
>>> boost state support:
>>> Supported: yes
>>> Active: yes
>>> And I have: kernel.sched_energy_aware = 1
>>>
>>>> Is this on a physical machine or in a virtual machine ?
>>> I think it happened on both.
>>> I added additional error reporting to the test (running on kernel
>>> 6.0.18-300.fc37.x86_64), and it seems that there is something that is
>>> mucking with affinity masks:
>>> info: Detected CPU set size (in bits): 64
>>> info: Maximum test CPU: 19
>>> error: Pinned thread 17 ran on impossible cpu 7
>>> info: getcpu reported CPU 7, node 0
>>> info: CPU affinity mask: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
>>> error: Pinned thread 3 ran on impossible cpu 13
>>> info: getcpu reported CPU 13, node 0
>>> info: CPU affinity mask: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
>>> info: Main thread ran on 2 CPU(s) of 20 available CPU(s)
>>> info: Other threads ran on 20 CPU(s)
>>> For each of these threads, the affinity mask should be a singleton
>>> set.
>>> Now I need to find out if there is a process that changes affinity
>>> settings.
>> If it's not cpu hotunplug, then perhaps something like systemd
>> modifies the AllowedCPUs of your cpuset concurrently ?
> It's probably just this kernel bug:
>
> commit da019032819a1f09943d3af676892ec8c627668e
> Author: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
> Date: Thu Sep 22 14:00:39 2022 -0400
>
> sched: Enforce user requested affinity
>
> It was found that the user requested affinity via sched_setaffinity()
> can be easily overwritten by other kernel subsystems without an easy way
> to reset it back to what the user requested. For example, any change
> to the current cpuset hierarchy may reset the cpumask of the tasks in
> the affected cpusets to the default cpuset value even if those tasks
> have pre-existing user requested affinity. That is especially easy to
> trigger under a cgroup v2 environment where writing "+cpuset" to the
> root cgroup's cgroup.subtree_control file will reset the cpus affinity
> of all the processes in the system.
>
> That is problematic in a nohz_full environment where the tasks running
> in the nohz_full CPUs usually have their cpus affinity explicitly set
> and will behave incorrectly if cpus affinity changes.
>
> Fix this problem by looking at user_cpus_ptr in __set_cpus_allowed_ptr()
> and use it to restrcit the given cpumask unless there is no overlap. In
> that case, it will fallback to the given one. The SCA_USER flag is
> reused to indicate intent to set user_cpus_ptr and so user_cpus_ptr
> masking should be skipped. In addition, masking should also be skipped
> if any of the SCA_MIGRATE_* flag is set.
>
> All callers of set_cpus_allowed_ptr() will be affected by this change.
> A scratch cpumask is added to percpu runqueues structure for doing
> additional masking when user_cpus_ptr is set.
>
> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220922180041.1768141-4-longman@redhat.com
>
> I don't think it's been merged into any stable kernels yet?
This patch will be in the v6.2 kernel. Since it is not marked as a fix,
it won't go into a stable kernel by default.
Cheers,
Longman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists