| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <45e0f8ea-d229-1ae7-5c12-7f0a64c6767a@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2023 21:49:49 -0500
From: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To: Qais Yousef <qyousef@...alina.io>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, tj@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, luca.abeni@...tannapisa.it,
claudio@...dence.eu.com, tommaso.cucinotta@...tannapisa.it,
bristot@...hat.com, mathieu.poirier@...aro.org,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Wei Wang <wvw@...gle.com>, Rick Yiu <rickyiu@...gle.com>,
Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched: cpuset: Don't rebuild sched domains on
suspend-resume
On 1/25/23 11:35, Qais Yousef wrote:
> On 01/20/23 17:16, Waiman Long wrote:
>> On 1/20/23 14:48, Qais Yousef wrote:
>>> Commit f9a25f776d78 ("cpusets: Rebuild root domain deadline accounting information")
>>> enabled rebuilding sched domain on cpuset and hotplug operations to
>>> correct deadline accounting.
>>>
>>> Rebuilding sched domain is a slow operation and we see 10+ ms delay on
>>> suspend-resume because of that.
>>>
>>> Since nothing is expected to change on suspend-resume operation; skip
>>> rebuilding the sched domains to regain the time lost.
>>>
>>> Debugged-by: Rick Yiu <rickyiu@...gle.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Qais Yousef (Google) <qyousef@...alina.io>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Changes in v2:
>>> * Remove redundant check in update_tasks_root_domain() (Thanks Waiman)
>>> v1 link:
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20221216233501.gh6m75e7s66dmjgo@airbuntu/
>>>
>>> kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 3 +++
>>> kernel/sched/deadline.c | 3 +++
>>> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
>>> index a29c0b13706b..9a45f083459c 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
>>> @@ -1088,6 +1088,9 @@ static void rebuild_root_domains(void)
>>> lockdep_assert_cpus_held();
>>> lockdep_assert_held(&sched_domains_mutex);
>>> + if (cpuhp_tasks_frozen)
>>> + return;
>>> +
>>> rcu_read_lock();
>>> /*
>>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
>>> index 0d97d54276cc..42c1143a3956 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
>>> @@ -2575,6 +2575,9 @@ void dl_clear_root_domain(struct root_domain *rd)
>>> {
>>> unsigned long flags;
>>> + if (cpuhp_tasks_frozen)
>>> + return;
>>> +
>>> raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&rd->dl_bw.lock, flags);
>>> rd->dl_bw.total_bw = 0;
>>> raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rd->dl_bw.lock, flags);
>> cpuhp_tasks_frozen is set when thaw_secondary_cpus() or
>> freeze_secondary_cpus() is called. I don't know the exact suspend/resume
>> calling sequences, will cpuhp_tasks_frozen be cleared at the end of resume
>> sequence? Maybe we should make sure that rebuild_root_domain() is called at
>> least once at the end of resume operation.
> Very good questions. It made me look at the logic again and I realize now that
> the way force_build behaves is causing this issue.
>
> I *think* we should just make the call rebuild_root_domains() only if
> cpus_updated in cpuset_hotplug_workfn().
>
> cpuset_cpu_active() seems to be the source of force_rebuild in my case; which
> seems to be called only after the last cpu is back online (what you suggest).
> In this case we can end up with cpus_updated = false, but force_rebuild = true.
>
> Now you added a couple of new users to force_rebuild in 4b842da276a8a; I'm
> trying to figure out what the conditions would be there. It seems we can have
> corner cases for cpus_update might not trigger correctly?
>
> Could the below be a good cure?
>
> AFAICT we must rebuild the root domains if something has changed in cpuset.
> Which should be captured by either having:
>
> * cpus_updated = true
> * force_rebuild && !cpuhp_tasks_frozen
>
> /me goes to test the patch
>
> --->8---
>
> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> index a29c0b13706b..363e4459559f 100644
> --- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> @@ -1079,6 +1079,8 @@ static void update_tasks_root_domain(struct cpuset *cs)
> css_task_iter_end(&it);
> }
>
> +static bool need_rebuild_rd = true;
> +
> static void rebuild_root_domains(void)
> {
> struct cpuset *cs = NULL;
> @@ -1088,6 +1090,9 @@ static void rebuild_root_domains(void)
> lockdep_assert_cpus_held();
> lockdep_assert_held(&sched_domains_mutex);
>
> + if (!need_rebuild_rd)
> + return;
> +
> rcu_read_lock();
>
> /*
> @@ -3627,7 +3632,9 @@ static void cpuset_hotplug_workfn(struct work_struct *work)
> /* rebuild sched domains if cpus_allowed has changed */
> if (cpus_updated || force_rebuild) {
> force_rebuild = false;
> + need_rebuild_rd = cpus_updated || (force_rebuild && !cpuhp_tasks_frozen);
> rebuild_sched_domains();
> + need_rebuild_rd = true;
You do the force_check check after it is set to false in the previous
statement which is definitely not correct. So it will be false whenever
cpus_updated is false.
If you just want to skip rebuild_sched_domains() call for hotplug, why
don't just skip the call here if the condition is right? Like
/* rebuild sched domains if cpus_allowed has changed */
if (cpus_updated || (force_rebuild && !cpuhp_tasks_frozen)) {
force_rebuild = false;
rebuild_sched_domains();
}
Still, we will need to confirm that cpuhp_tasks_frozen will be cleared
outside of the suspend/resume cycle.
Cheers,
Longman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists