[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <xm268rcn9gis.fsf@google.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2023 14:52:27 -0700
From: Benjamin Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>
To: Hao Jia <jiahao.os@...edance.com>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...nel.org,
juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, mgorman@...e.de,
bristot@...hat.com, vschneid@...hat.com,
mgorman@...hsingularity.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] sched/core: Avoid multiple calling
update_rq_clock() in unthrottle_offline_cfs_rqs()
Hao Jia <jiahao.os@...edance.com> writes:
> This WARN_DOUBLE_CLOCK warning is triggered during cpu offline.
> ------------[ cut here ]------------
> rq->clock_update_flags & RQCF_UPDATED
> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 3323 at kernel/sched/core.c:741
> update_rq_clock+0xaf/0x180
> Call Trace:
> <TASK>
> unthrottle_cfs_rq+0x4b/0x300
> rq_offline_fair+0x89/0x90
> set_rq_offline.part.118+0x28/0x60
> rq_attach_root+0xc4/0xd0
> cpu_attach_domain+0x3dc/0x7f0
> partition_sched_domains_locked+0x2a5/0x3c0
> rebuild_sched_domains_locked+0x477/0x830
> rebuild_sched_domains+0x1b/0x30
> cpuset_hotplug_workfn+0x2ca/0xc90
> ? balance_push+0x56/0xf0
> ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x15/0x30
> ? finish_task_switch+0x98/0x2f0
> ? __switch_to+0x291/0x410
> ? __schedule+0x65e/0x1310
> process_one_work+0x1bc/0x3d0
> worker_thread+0x4c/0x380
> ? preempt_count_add+0x92/0xa0
> ? rescuer_thread+0x310/0x310
> kthread+0xe6/0x110
> ? kthread_complete_and_exit+0x20/0x20
> ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
>
> The rq clock has been updated in the set_rq_offline(),
> so we don't need to call update_rq_clock() in
> unthrottle_offline_cfs_rqs().
> We only need to call rq_clock_start_loop_update() before the
> loop starts and rq_clock_stop_loop_update() after the loop
> to avoid this warning.
>
Both of these cfsb patches look sensible to me.
Reviewed-By: Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists