Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 8 Aug 2019 08:52:25 +0200 | From | Juri Lelli <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 12/13] sched/deadline: Introduce deadline servers |
| |
Hi Dietmar,
On 07/08/19 18:31, Dietmar Eggemann wrote: > On 7/26/19 4:54 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> > > [...] > > > @@ -889,6 +891,8 @@ static void update_curr(struct cfs_rq *c > > trace_sched_stat_runtime(curtask, delta_exec, curr->vruntime); > > cgroup_account_cputime(curtask, delta_exec); > > account_group_exec_runtime(curtask, delta_exec); > > + if (curtask->server) > > + dl_server_update(curtask->server, delta_exec); > > } > > I get a lockdep_assert_held(&rq->lock) related warning in start_dl_timer() > when running the full stack. > > ... > [ 0.530216] root domain span: 0-5 (max cpu_capacity = 1024) > [ 0.538655] devtmpfs: initialized > [ 0.556485] update_curr: rq mismatch rq[0] != rq[4] > [ 0.561519] update_curr: rq mismatch rq[0] != rq[4] > [ 0.566497] update_curr: rq mismatch rq[0] != rq[4] > [ 0.571443] update_curr: rq mismatch rq[0] != rq[4] > [ 0.576762] update_curr: rq mismatch rq[2] != rq[4] > [ 0.581674] update_curr: rq mismatch rq[2] != rq[4] > [ 0.586569] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > [ 0.591220] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 2 at kernel/sched/deadline.c:916 start_dl_timer+0x160/0x178 > [ 0.599686] Modules linked in: > [ 0.602756] CPU: 2 PID: 2 Comm: kthreadd Tainted: G W 5.3.0-rc3-00013-ga33cf033cc99-dirty #64 > [ 0.612620] Hardware name: ARM Juno development board (r0) (DT) > [ 0.618560] pstate: 60000085 (nZCv daIf -PAN -UAO) > [ 0.623369] pc : start_dl_timer+0x160/0x178 > [ 0.627572] lr : start_dl_timer+0x160/0x178 > [ 0.631768] sp : ffff000010013cb0 > ... > [ 0.715075] Call trace: > [ 0.717531] start_dl_timer+0x160/0x178 > [ 0.721382] update_curr_dl_se+0x108/0x208 > [ 0.725494] dl_server_update+0x2c/0x38 > [ 0.729348] update_curr+0x1b4/0x3b8 > [ 0.732934] task_tick_fair+0x74/0xa88 > [ 0.736698] scheduler_tick+0x94/0x110 > [ 0.740461] update_process_times+0x48/0x60 > ... > > Seems to be related to the fact that the rq can change: > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c > index e4c14851a34c..5e3130a200ec 100644 > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c > @@ -891,8 +891,17 @@ static void update_curr(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq) > trace_sched_stat_runtime(curtask, delta_exec, curr->vruntime); > cgroup_account_cputime(curtask, delta_exec); > account_group_exec_runtime(curtask, delta_exec); > - if (curtask->server) > + if (curtask->server) { > + struct rq *rq = rq_of(cfs_rq); > + struct rq *rq2 = curtask->server->rq; > + > + if (rq != rq2) { > + printk("update_curr: rq mismatch rq[%d] != rq[%d]\n", > + cpu_of(rq), cpu_of(rq2)); > + } > + > dl_server_update(curtask->server, delta_exec); > + } > } > > ...
Yeah, I actually noticed the same. Some debugging seems to point to early boot spawning of kthreads. I can reliably for example attribute this mismatch to ksoftirqd(s). It looks like they can avoid the dl_server assignment in pick_next_task_dl() and this breaks things. Still need to figure out why this happens and how to fix it, though.
Best,
Juri
| |