blaster4385/linux-IllusionX/kernel/sched/core.c, branch v6.12.10

sched/fair: Fix sched_can_stop_tick() for fair tasks

2024-12-27T13:01:58Z

[ Upstream commit c1f43c342e1f2e32f0620bf2e972e2a9ea0a1e60 ] We can't stop the tick of a rq if there are at least 2 tasks enqueued in the whole hierarchy and not only at the root cfs rq. rq->cfs.nr_running tracks the number of sched_entity at one level whereas rq->cfs.h_nr_running tracks all queued tasks in the hierarchy. Fixes: 11cc374f4643b ("sched_ext: Simplify scx_can_stop_tick() invocation in sched_can_stop_tick()") Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241202174606.4074512-2-vincent.guittot@linaro.org Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

sched/core: Prevent wakeup of ksoftirqd during idle load balance

2024-12-14T19:04:12Z

[ Upstream commit e932c4ab38f072ce5894b2851fea8bc5754bb8e5 ] Scheduler raises a SCHED_SOFTIRQ to trigger a load balancing event on from the IPI handler on the idle CPU. If the SMP function is invoked from an idle CPU via flush_smp_call_function_queue() then the HARD-IRQ flag is not set and raise_softirq_irqoff() needlessly wakes ksoftirqd because soft interrupts are handled before ksoftirqd get on the CPU. Adding a trace_printk() in nohz_csd_func() at the spot of raising SCHED_SOFTIRQ and enabling trace events for sched_switch, sched_wakeup, and softirq_entry (for SCHED_SOFTIRQ vector alone) helps observing the current behavior: -0 [000] dN.1.: nohz_csd_func: Raising SCHED_SOFTIRQ from nohz_csd_func -0 [000] dN.4.: sched_wakeup: comm=ksoftirqd/0 pid=16 prio=120 target_cpu=000 -0 [000] .Ns1.: softirq_entry: vec=7 [action=SCHED] -0 [000] .Ns1.: softirq_exit: vec=7 [action=SCHED] -0 [000] d..2.: sched_switch: prev_comm=swapper/0 prev_pid=0 prev_prio=120 prev_state=R ==> next_comm=ksoftirqd/0 next_pid=16 next_prio=120 ksoftirqd/0-16 [000] d..2.: sched_switch: prev_comm=ksoftirqd/0 prev_pid=16 prev_prio=120 prev_state=S ==> next_comm=swapper/0 next_pid=0 next_prio=120 ... Use __raise_softirq_irqoff() to raise the softirq. The SMP function call is always invoked on the requested CPU in an interrupt handler. It is guaranteed that soft interrupts are handled at the end. Following are the observations with the changes when enabling the same set of events: -0 [000] dN.1.: nohz_csd_func: Raising SCHED_SOFTIRQ for nohz_idle_balance -0 [000] dN.1.: softirq_raise: vec=7 [action=SCHED] -0 [000] .Ns1.: softirq_entry: vec=7 [action=SCHED] No unnecessary ksoftirqd wakeups are seen from idle task's context to service the softirq. Fixes: b2a02fc43a1f ("smp: Optimize send_call_function_single_ipi()") Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/fcf823f-195e-6c9a-eac3-25f870cb35ac@inria.fr/ [1] Reported-by: Julia Lawall Suggested-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Signed-off-by: K Prateek Nayak Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Reviewed-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241119054432.6405-5-kprateek.nayak@amd.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

sched/core: Remove the unnecessary need_resched() check in nohz_csd_func()

2024-12-14T19:04:12Z

[ Upstream commit ea9cffc0a154124821531991d5afdd7e8b20d7aa ] The need_resched() check currently in nohz_csd_func() can be tracked to have been added in scheduler_ipi() back in 2011 via commit ca38062e57e9 ("sched: Use resched IPI to kick off the nohz idle balance") Since then, it has travelled quite a bit but it seems like an idle_cpu() check currently is sufficient to detect the need to bail out from an idle load balancing. To justify this removal, consider all the following case where an idle load balancing could race with a task wakeup: o Since commit f3dd3f674555b ("sched: Remove the limitation of WF_ON_CPU on wakelist if wakee cpu is idle") a target perceived to be idle (target_rq->nr_running == 0) will return true for ttwu_queue_cond(target) which will offload the task wakeup to the idle target via an IPI. In all such cases target_rq->ttwu_pending will be set to 1 before queuing the wake function. If an idle load balance races here, following scenarios are possible: - The CPU is not in TIF_POLLING_NRFLAG mode in which case an actual IPI is sent to the CPU to wake it out of idle. If the nohz_csd_func() queues before sched_ttwu_pending(), the idle load balance will bail out since idle_cpu(target) returns 0 since target_rq->ttwu_pending is 1. If the nohz_csd_func() is queued after sched_ttwu_pending() it should see rq->nr_running to be non-zero and bail out of idle load balancing. - The CPU is in TIF_POLLING_NRFLAG mode and instead of an actual IPI, the sender will simply set TIF_NEED_RESCHED for the target to put it out of idle and flush_smp_call_function_queue() in do_idle() will execute the call function. Depending on the ordering of the queuing of nohz_csd_func() and sched_ttwu_pending(), the idle_cpu() check in nohz_csd_func() should either see target_rq->ttwu_pending = 1 or target_rq->nr_running to be non-zero if there is a genuine task wakeup racing with the idle load balance kick. o The waker CPU perceives the target CPU to be busy (targer_rq->nr_running != 0) but the CPU is in fact going idle and due to a series of unfortunate events, the system reaches a case where the waker CPU decides to perform the wakeup by itself in ttwu_queue() on the target CPU but target is concurrently selected for idle load balance (XXX: Can this happen? I'm not sure, but we'll consider the mother of all coincidences to estimate the worst case scenario). ttwu_do_activate() calls enqueue_task() which would increment "rq->nr_running" post which it calls wakeup_preempt() which is responsible for setting TIF_NEED_RESCHED (via a resched IPI or by setting TIF_NEED_RESCHED on a TIF_POLLING_NRFLAG idle CPU) The key thing to note in this case is that rq->nr_running is already non-zero in case of a wakeup before TIF_NEED_RESCHED is set which would lead to idle_cpu() check returning false. In all cases, it seems that need_resched() check is unnecessary when checking for idle_cpu() first since an impending wakeup racing with idle load balancer will either set the "rq->ttwu_pending" or indicate a newly woken task via "rq->nr_running". Chasing the reason why this check might have existed in the first place, I came across Peter's suggestion on the fist iteration of Suresh's patch from 2011 [1] where the condition to raise the SCHED_SOFTIRQ was: sched_ttwu_do_pending(list); if (unlikely((rq->idle == current) && rq->nohz_balance_kick && !need_resched())) raise_softirq_irqoff(SCHED_SOFTIRQ); Since the condition to raise the SCHED_SOFIRQ was preceded by sched_ttwu_do_pending() (which is equivalent of sched_ttwu_pending()) in the current upstream kernel, the need_resched() check was necessary to catch a newly queued task. Peter suggested modifying it to: if (idle_cpu() && rq->nohz_balance_kick && !need_resched()) raise_softirq_irqoff(SCHED_SOFTIRQ); where idle_cpu() seems to have replaced "rq->idle == current" check. Even back then, the idle_cpu() check would have been sufficient to catch a new task being enqueued. Since commit b2a02fc43a1f ("smp: Optimize send_call_function_single_ipi()") overloads the interpretation of TIF_NEED_RESCHED for TIF_POLLING_NRFLAG idling, remove the need_resched() check in nohz_csd_func() to raise SCHED_SOFTIRQ based on Peter's suggestion. Fixes: b2a02fc43a1f ("smp: Optimize send_call_function_single_ipi()") Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra Signed-off-by: K Prateek Nayak Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241119054432.6405-3-kprateek.nayak@amd.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

sched: Initialize idle tasks only once

2024-12-06T06:20:46Z

commit b23decf8ac9102fc52c4de5196f4dc0a5f3eb80b upstream. Idle tasks are initialized via __sched_fork() twice: fork_idle() copy_process() sched_fork() __sched_fork() init_idle() __sched_fork() Instead of cleaning this up, sched_ext hacked around it. Even when analyis and solution were provided in a discussion, nobody cared to clean this up. init_idle() is also invoked from sched_init() to initialize the boot CPU's idle task, which requires the __sched_fork() invocation. But this can be trivially solved by invoking __sched_fork() before init_idle() in sched_init() and removing the __sched_fork() invocation from init_idle(). Do so and clean up the comments explaining this historical leftover. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241028103142.359584747@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

Merge tag 'sched_ext-for-6.12-rc7-fixes' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/sched_ext

2024-11-11T22:09:57Z

Pull sched_ext fixes from Tejun Heo: - The fair sched class currently has a bug where its balance() returns true telling the sched core that it has tasks to run but then NULL from pick_task(). This makes sched core call sched_ext's pick_task() without preceding balance() which can lead to stalls in partial mode. For now, work around by detecting the condition and forcing the CPU to go through another scheduling cycle. - Add a missing newline to an error message and fix drgn introspection tool which went out of sync. * tag 'sched_ext-for-6.12-rc7-fixes' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/sched_ext: sched_ext: Handle cases where pick_task_scx() is called without preceding balance_scx() sched_ext: Update scx_show_state.py to match scx_ops_bypass_depth's new type sched_ext: Add a missing newline at the end of an error message

sched_ext: Handle cases where pick_task_scx() is called without preceding balance_scx()

2024-11-09T20:43:55Z

sched_ext dispatches tasks from the BPF scheduler from balance_scx() and thus every pick_task_scx() call must be preceded by balance_scx(). While this usually holds, due to a bug, there are cases where the fair class's balance() returns true indicating that it has tasks to run on the CPU and thus terminating balance() calls but fails to actually find the next task to run when pick_task() is called. In such cases, pick_task_scx() can be called without preceding balance_scx(). Detect this condition using SCX_RQ_BAL_PENDING flags. If detected, keep running the previous task if possible and avoid stalling from entering idle without balancing. Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo Cc: Peter Zijlstra Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/Ztj_h5c2LYsdXYbA@slm.duckdns.org

sched: Pass correct scheduling policy to __setscheduler_class

2024-10-29T12:57:51Z

Commit 98442f0ccd82 ("sched: Fix delayed_dequeue vs switched_from_fair()") overlooked that __setscheduler_prio(), now __setscheduler_class() relies on p->policy for task_should_scx(), and moved the call before __setscheduler_params() updates it, causing it to be using the old p->policy value. Resolve this by changing task_should_scx() to take the policy itself instead of a task pointer, such that __sched_setscheduler() can pass in the updated policy. Fixes: 98442f0ccd82 ("sched: Fix delayed_dequeue vs switched_from_fair()") Signed-off-by: Aboorva Devarajan Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Acked-by: Tejun Heo

Merge branch 'linus' into sched/urgent, to resolve conflict

2024-10-17T07:58:07Z

Conflicts: kernel/sched/ext.c There's a context conflict between this upstream commit: 3fdb9ebcec10 sched_ext: Start schedulers with consistent p->scx.slice values ... and this fix in sched/urgent: 98442f0ccd82 sched: Fix delayed_dequeue vs switched_from_fair() Resolve it. Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar

sched/fair: Fix external p->on_rq users

2024-10-14T07:14:35Z

Sean noted that ever since commit 152e11f6df29 ("sched/fair: Implement delayed dequeue") KVM's preemption notifiers have started mis-classifying preemption vs blocking. Notably p->on_rq is no longer sufficient to determine if a task is runnable or blocked -- the aforementioned commit introduces tasks that remain on the runqueue even through they will not run again, and should be considered blocked for many cases. Add the task_is_runnable() helper to classify things and audit all external users of the p->on_rq state. Also add a few comments. Fixes: 152e11f6df29 ("sched/fair: Implement delayed dequeue") Reported-by: Sean Christopherson Tested-by: Sean Christopherson Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20241010091843.GK33184@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net

sched/psi: Fix mistaken CPU pressure indication after corrupted task state bug

2024-10-14T07:11:42Z

Since sched_delayed tasks remain queued even after blocking, the load balancer can migrate them between runqueues while PSI considers them to be asleep. As a result, it misreads the migration requeue followed by a wakeup as a double queue: psi: inconsistent task state! task=... cpu=... psi_flags=4 clear=. set=4 First, call psi_enqueue() after p->sched_class->enqueue_task(). A wakeup will clear p->se.sched_delayed while a migration will not, so psi can use that flag to tell them apart. Then teach psi to migrate any "sleep" state when delayed-dequeue tasks are being migrated. Delayed-dequeue tasks can be revived by ttwu_runnable(), which will call down with a new ENQUEUE_DELAYED. Instead of further complicating the wakeup conditional in enqueue_task(), identify migration contexts instead and default to wakeup handling for all other cases. It's not just the warning in dmesg, the task state corruption causes a permanent CPU pressure indication, which messes with workload/machine health monitoring. Debugged-by-and-original-fix-by: K Prateek Nayak Fixes: 152e11f6df29 ("sched/fair: Implement delayed dequeue") Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240830123458.3557-1-spasswolf@web.de/ Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/cd67fbcd-d659-4822-bb90-7e8fbb40a856@molgen.mpg.de/ Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar Tested-by: K Prateek Nayak Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20241010193712.GC181795@cmpxchg.org