lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Jul]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] sched/fair: do not announce throttled next buddy in dequeue_task_fair
2016-07-13 1:25 GMT+08:00  <bsegall@google.com>:
> Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru> writes:
>
>> On 11.07.2016 15:12, Xunlei Pang wrote:
>>> On 2016/07/11 at 17:54, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>>>> Hi Konstantin, Xunlei,
>>>> 2016-07-11 16:42 GMT+08:00 Xunlei Pang <xpang@redhat.com>:
>>>>> On 2016/07/11 at 16:22, Xunlei Pang wrote:
>>>>>> On 2016/07/11 at 15:25, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>>>>>>> 2016-06-16 20:57 GMT+08:00 Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru>:
>>>>>>>> Hierarchy could be already throttled at this point. Throttled next
>>>>>>>> buddy could trigger null pointer dereference in pick_next_task_fair().
>>>>>>> There is cfs_rq->next check in pick_next_entity(), so how can null
>>>>>>> pointer dereference happen?
>>>>>> I guess it's the following code leading to a NULL se returned:
>>>>> s/NULL/empty-entity cfs_rq se/
>>>>>
>>>>>> pick_next_entity():
>>>>>> if (cfs_rq->next && wakeup_preempt_entity(cfs_rq->next, left) < 1)
>>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>> I think this will return false.
>>>
>>> With the wrong throttled_hierarchy(), I think this can happen. But after we have the
>>> corrected throttled_hierarchy() patch, I can't see how it is possible.
>>>
>>> dequeue_task_fair():
>>> if (task_sleep && parent_entity(se))
>>> set_next_buddy(parent_entity(se));
>>>
>>> How does dequeue_task_fair() with DEQUEUE_SLEEP set(true task_sleep) happen to a throttled hierarchy?
>>> IOW, a task belongs to a throttled hierarchy is running?
>>>
>>> Maybe Konstantin knows the reason.
>>
>> This function (dequeue_task_fair) check throttling but at point it could skip several
>> levels and announce as next buddy actually throttled entry.
>> Probably this bug hadn't happened but this's really hard to prove that this is impossible.
>> ->set_curr_task(), PI-boost or some tricky migration in balancer could break this easily.
>
> sched_setscheduler can call put_prev_task, which then can cause a
> throttle outside of __schedule(), then the task blocks normally and
> deactivate_task(DEQUEUE_SLEEP) happens and you lose.

The cfs_rq_throttled() check in dequeue_task_fair() will capture the
cfs_rq which is throttled in sched_setscheduler::put_prev_task path,
so nothing lost, where I miss?

Regards,
Wanpeng Li

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-07-13 04:41    [W:0.095 / U:1.628 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site