linux-kernel - [PATCH] sched_ext: Fix lock imbalance in dispatch_to_local

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: <20250123234220.36680-1-arighi@nvidia.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2025 00:42:20 +0100
From: Andrea Righi <arighi@...dia.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	David Vernet <void@...ifault.com>,
	Changwoo Min <changwoo@...lia.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] sched_ext: Fix lock imbalance in dispatch_to_local_dsq()

While performing the rq locking dance in dispatch_to_local_dsq(), we may
trigger the following lock imbalance condition, in particular when
multiple tasks are rapidly changing CPU affinity (i.e., running a
`stress-ng --race-sched 0`):

[   13.413579] =====================================
[   13.413660] WARNING: bad unlock balance detected!
[   13.413729] 6.13.0-virtme #15 Not tainted
[   13.413792] -------------------------------------
[   13.413859] kworker/1:1/80 is trying to release lock (&rq->__lock) at:
[   13.413954] [<ffffffff873c6c48>] dispatch_to_local_dsq+0x108/0x1a0
[   13.414111] but there are no more locks to release!
[   13.414176]
[   13.414176] other info that might help us debug this:
[   13.414258] 1 lock held by kworker/1:1/80:
[   13.414318]  #0: ffff8b66feb41698 (&rq->__lock){-.-.}-{2:2}, at: raw_spin_rq_lock_nested+0x20/0x90
[   13.414612]
[   13.414612] stack backtrace:
[   13.415255] CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 80 Comm: kworker/1:1 Not tainted 6.13.0-virtme #15
[   13.415505] Workqueue:  0x0 (events)
[   13.415567] Sched_ext: dsp_local_on (enabled+all), task: runnable_at=-2ms
[   13.415570] Call Trace:
[   13.415700]  <TASK>
[   13.415744]  dump_stack_lvl+0x78/0xe0
[   13.415806]  ? dispatch_to_local_dsq+0x108/0x1a0
[   13.415884]  print_unlock_imbalance_bug+0x11b/0x130
[   13.415965]  ? dispatch_to_local_dsq+0x108/0x1a0
[   13.416226]  lock_release+0x231/0x2c0
[   13.416326]  _raw_spin_unlock+0x1b/0x40
[   13.416422]  dispatch_to_local_dsq+0x108/0x1a0
[   13.416554]  flush_dispatch_buf+0x199/0x1d0
[   13.416652]  balance_one+0x194/0x370
[   13.416751]  balance_scx+0x61/0x1e0
[   13.416848]  prev_balance+0x43/0xb0
[   13.416947]  __pick_next_task+0x6b/0x1b0
[   13.417052]  __schedule+0x20d/0x1740

This happens because dispatch_to_local_dsq() is racing with
dispatch_dequeue(), when the latter wins we incorrectly assume that the
task has been moved to the dst_rq.

Fix this by correctly assuming that task is still in the src_rq in this
specific scenario.

Fixes: 4d3ca89bdd31 ("sched_ext: Refactor consume_remote_task()")
Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <arighi@...dia.com>
---
 kernel/sched/ext.c | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/ext.c b/kernel/sched/ext.c
index a24d48cebfb7..7500b1a26757 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/ext.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/ext.c
@@ -2617,6 +2617,8 @@ static void dispatch_to_local_dsq(struct rq *rq, struct scx_dispatch_q *dst_dsq,
 		/* if the destination CPU is idle, wake it up */
 		if (sched_class_above(p->sched_class, dst_rq->curr->sched_class))
 			resched_curr(dst_rq);
+	} else {
+		dst_rq = src_rq;
 	}
 
 	/* switch back to @rq lock */
-- 
2.48.1