1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
|
From 95516b448b8dcc30ac9e5fc0e38c1c3d3f8ef930 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 16:24:52 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 258/347] workqueue: Prevent deadlock/stall on RT
Origin: https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/projects/rt/4.19/older/patches-4.19.246-rt110.tar.xz
Austin reported a XFS deadlock/stall on RT where scheduled work gets
never exececuted and tasks are waiting for each other for ever.
The underlying problem is the modification of the RT code to the
handling of workers which are about to go to sleep. In mainline a
worker thread which goes to sleep wakes an idle worker if there is
more work to do. This happens from the guts of the schedule()
function. On RT this must be outside and the accessed data structures
are not protected against scheduling due to the spinlock to rtmutex
conversion. So the naive solution to this was to move the code outside
of the scheduler and protect the data structures by the pool
lock. That approach turned out to be a little naive as we cannot call
into that code when the thread blocks on a lock, as it is not allowed
to block on two locks in parallel. So we dont call into the worker
wakeup magic when the worker is blocked on a lock, which causes the
deadlock/stall observed by Austin and Mike.
Looking deeper into that worker code it turns out that the only
relevant data structure which needs to be protected is the list of
idle workers which can be woken up.
So the solution is to protect the list manipulation operations with
preempt_enable/disable pairs on RT and call unconditionally into the
worker code even when the worker is blocked on a lock. The preemption
protection is safe as there is nothing which can fiddle with the list
outside of thread context.
Reported-and_tested-by: Austin Schuh <austin@peloton-tech.com>
Reported-and_tested-by: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: http://vger.kernel.org/r/alpine.DEB.2.10.1406271249510.5170@nanos
Cc: Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@gmail.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
---
kernel/sched/core.c | 6 +++--
kernel/workqueue.c | 60 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index 0995748a3a1d..feaf4d5683af 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -3615,9 +3615,8 @@ void __noreturn do_task_dead(void)
static inline void sched_submit_work(struct task_struct *tsk)
{
- if (!tsk->state || tsk_is_pi_blocked(tsk))
+ if (!tsk->state)
return;
-
/*
* If a worker went to sleep, notify and ask workqueue whether
* it wants to wake up a task to maintain concurrency.
@@ -3631,6 +3630,9 @@ static inline void sched_submit_work(struct task_struct *tsk)
preempt_enable_no_resched();
}
+ if (tsk_is_pi_blocked(tsk))
+ return;
+
/*
* If we are going to sleep and we have plugged IO queued,
* make sure to submit it to avoid deadlocks.
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 0c529f920232..91f5696cf335 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -126,6 +126,11 @@ enum {
* cpu or grabbing pool->lock is enough for read access. If
* POOL_DISASSOCIATED is set, it's identical to L.
*
+ * On RT we need the extra protection via rt_lock_idle_list() for
+ * the list manipulations against read access from
+ * wq_worker_sleeping(). All other places are nicely serialized via
+ * pool->lock.
+ *
* A: wq_pool_attach_mutex protected.
*
* PL: wq_pool_mutex protected.
@@ -431,6 +436,31 @@ static void workqueue_sysfs_unregister(struct workqueue_struct *wq);
if (({ assert_rcu_or_wq_mutex(wq); false; })) { } \
else
+#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_BASE
+static inline void rt_lock_idle_list(struct worker_pool *pool)
+{
+ preempt_disable();
+}
+static inline void rt_unlock_idle_list(struct worker_pool *pool)
+{
+ preempt_enable();
+}
+static inline void sched_lock_idle_list(struct worker_pool *pool) { }
+static inline void sched_unlock_idle_list(struct worker_pool *pool) { }
+#else
+static inline void rt_lock_idle_list(struct worker_pool *pool) { }
+static inline void rt_unlock_idle_list(struct worker_pool *pool) { }
+static inline void sched_lock_idle_list(struct worker_pool *pool)
+{
+ spin_lock_irq(&pool->lock);
+}
+static inline void sched_unlock_idle_list(struct worker_pool *pool)
+{
+ spin_unlock_irq(&pool->lock);
+}
+#endif
+
+
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_OBJECTS_WORK
static struct debug_obj_descr work_debug_descr;
@@ -837,10 +867,16 @@ static struct worker *first_idle_worker(struct worker_pool *pool)
*/
static void wake_up_worker(struct worker_pool *pool)
{
- struct worker *worker = first_idle_worker(pool);
+ struct worker *worker;
+
+ rt_lock_idle_list(pool);
+
+ worker = first_idle_worker(pool);
if (likely(worker))
wake_up_process(worker->task);
+
+ rt_unlock_idle_list(pool);
}
/**
@@ -869,7 +905,7 @@ void wq_worker_running(struct task_struct *task)
*/
void wq_worker_sleeping(struct task_struct *task)
{
- struct worker *next, *worker = kthread_data(task);
+ struct worker *worker = kthread_data(task);
struct worker_pool *pool;
/*
@@ -886,26 +922,18 @@ void wq_worker_sleeping(struct task_struct *task)
return;
worker->sleeping = 1;
- spin_lock_irq(&pool->lock);
/*
* The counterpart of the following dec_and_test, implied mb,
* worklist not empty test sequence is in insert_work().
* Please read comment there.
- *
- * NOT_RUNNING is clear. This means that we're bound to and
- * running on the local cpu w/ rq lock held and preemption
- * disabled, which in turn means that none else could be
- * manipulating idle_list, so dereferencing idle_list without pool
- * lock is safe.
*/
if (atomic_dec_and_test(&pool->nr_running) &&
!list_empty(&pool->worklist)) {
- next = first_idle_worker(pool);
- if (next)
- wake_up_process(next->task);
+ sched_lock_idle_list(pool);
+ wake_up_worker(pool);
+ sched_unlock_idle_list(pool);
}
- spin_unlock_irq(&pool->lock);
}
/**
@@ -1678,7 +1706,9 @@ static void worker_enter_idle(struct worker *worker)
worker->last_active = jiffies;
/* idle_list is LIFO */
+ rt_lock_idle_list(pool);
list_add(&worker->entry, &pool->idle_list);
+ rt_unlock_idle_list(pool);
if (too_many_workers(pool) && !timer_pending(&pool->idle_timer))
mod_timer(&pool->idle_timer, jiffies + IDLE_WORKER_TIMEOUT);
@@ -1711,7 +1741,9 @@ static void worker_leave_idle(struct worker *worker)
return;
worker_clr_flags(worker, WORKER_IDLE);
pool->nr_idle--;
+ rt_lock_idle_list(pool);
list_del_init(&worker->entry);
+ rt_unlock_idle_list(pool);
}
static struct worker *alloc_worker(int node)
@@ -1876,7 +1908,9 @@ static void destroy_worker(struct worker *worker)
pool->nr_workers--;
pool->nr_idle--;
+ rt_lock_idle_list(pool);
list_del_init(&worker->entry);
+ rt_unlock_idle_list(pool);
worker->flags |= WORKER_DIE;
wake_up_process(worker->task);
}
--
2.36.1
|
