This issue was discovered on a 4.9-based android device, but the
relevant mainline code appears to be the same. The symptom is that
over time the some workloads become sluggish resulting in missed
frames or sluggishness. It appears to be the same issue described in
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2018-March/567836.html.
Here is the scenario: A task is deactivated while still in the fair
class. The task is then boosted to RT, so rt_mutex_setprio() is
called. This changes the task to RT and calls check_class_changed(),
which eventually calls detach_task_cfs_rq(), which is where
vruntime_normalized() sees that the task's state is TASK_WAKING, which
results in skipping the subtraction of the rq's min_vruntime from the
task's vruntime. Later, when the prio is deboosted and the task is
moved back to the fair class, the fair rq's min_vruntime is added to
the task's vruntime, resulting in vruntime inflation.
When investigating the problem, it was found that the change below
fixes the problem by forcing vruntime_normalized() to return false if
the sched_class is not CFS (though we're concerned that it might
introduce other issues):
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 91f7b3322a15..267056f2e2ca 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -11125,7 +11125,7 @@ static inline bool vruntime_normalized(struct
task_struct *p)
* - A task which has been woken up by try_to_wake_up() and
* waiting for actually being woken up by sched_ttwu_pending().
*/
- if (!se->sum_exec_runtime || p->state == TASK_WAKING)
+ if (!se->sum_exec_runtime || (p->state == TASK_WAKING &&
p->sched_class == &fair_sched_class))
return true;
return false;
Do folks agree that this is incorrect behavior? Does this fix look
appropriate and safe? Other ideas?
-Todd
On 08/07/2018 10:40 AM, 'Todd Kjos' via kernel-team wrote:
> This issue was discovered on a 4.9-based android device, but the
> relevant mainline code appears to be the same. The symptom is that
> over time the some workloads become sluggish resulting in missed
> frames or sluggishness. It appears to be the same issue described in
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2018-March/567836.html.
>
> Here is the scenario: A task is deactivated while still in the fair
> class. The task is then boosted to RT, so rt_mutex_setprio() is
> called. This changes the task to RT and calls check_class_changed(),
> which eventually calls detach_task_cfs_rq(), which is where
> vruntime_normalized() sees that the task's state is TASK_WAKING, which
> results in skipping the subtraction of the rq's min_vruntime from the
> task's vruntime. Later, when the prio is deboosted and the task is
> moved back to the fair class, the fair rq's min_vruntime is added to
> the task's vruntime, resulting in vruntime inflation.
This was reproduced for me on tip of mainline by using the program at
the end of this mail. It was run in a 2 CPU virtualbox VM. Relevant
annotated bits of the trace:
low-prio thread vruntime is 752ms
pi-vruntime-tes-598 [001] d... 520.572459: sched_stat_runtime:
comm=pi-vruntime-tes pid=598 runtime=29953 [ns] vruntime=752888705 [ns]
low-prio thread waits on a_sem
pi-vruntime-tes-598 [001] d... 520.572465: sched_switch:
prev_comm=pi-vruntime-tes prev_pid=598 prev_prio=120 prev_state=D ==>
next_comm=swapper/1 next_pid=0 next_prio=120
high prio thread finishes wakeup, then sleeps for 1ms
<idle>-0 [000] dNh. 520.572483: sched_wakeup:
comm=pi-vruntime-tes pid=597 prio=19 target_cpu=000
<idle>-0 [000] d... 520.572486: sched_switch:
prev_comm=swapper/0 prev_pid=0 prev_prio=120 prev_state=S ==>
next_comm=pi-vruntime-tes next_pid=597 next_prio=19
pi-vruntime-tes-597 [000] d... 520.572498: sched_switch:
prev_comm=pi-vruntime-tes prev_pid=597 prev_prio=19 prev_state=D ==>
next_comm=swapper/0 next_pid=0 next_prio=120
high prio thread wakes up after 1ms sleep, posts a_sem which starts to
wake low-prio thread, then tries to grab pi_mutex, which low-prio thread has
<idle>-0 [000] d.h. 520.573876: sched_waking:
comm=pi-vruntime-tes pid=597 prio=19 target_cpu=000
<idle>-0 [000] dNh. 520.573879: sched_wakeup:
comm=pi-vruntime-tes pid=597 prio=19 target_cpu=000
<idle>-0 [000] d... 520.573887: sched_switch:
prev_comm=swapper/0 prev_pid=0 prev_prio=120 prev_state=S ==>
next_comm=pi-vruntime-tes next_pid=597 next_prio=19
pi-vruntime-tes-597 [000] d... 520.573895: sched_waking:
comm=pi-vruntime-tes pid=598 prio=120 target_cpu=001
low-prio thread pid 598 gets pi_mutex priority inheritance, this happens
while low-prio thread is in waking state
pi-vruntime-tes-597 [000] d... 520.573911: sched_pi_setprio:
comm=pi-vruntime-tes pid=598 oldprio=120 newprio=19
high-prio thread sleeps on pi_mutex
pi-vruntime-tes-597 [000] d... 520.573919: sched_switch:
prev_comm=pi-vruntime-tes prev_pid=597 prev_prio=19 prev_state=D ==>
next_comm=swapper/0 next_pid=0 next_prio=120
low-prio thread finishes wakeup
<idle>-0 [001] dNh. 520.573932: sched_wakeup:
comm=pi-vruntime-tes pid=598 prio=19 target_cpu=001
<idle>-0 [001] d... 520.573936: sched_switch:
prev_comm=swapper/1 prev_pid=0 prev_prio=120 prev_state=S ==>
next_comm=pi-vruntime-tes next_pid=598 next_prio=19
low-prio thread releases pi-mutex, loses pi boost, high-prio thread
wakes for pi-mutex
pi-vruntime-tes-598 [001] d... 520.573946: sched_pi_setprio:
comm=pi-vruntime-tes pid=598 oldprio=19 newprio=120
pi-vruntime-tes-598 [001] dN.. 520.573954: sched_waking:
comm=pi-vruntime-tes pid=597 prio=19 target_cpu=000
low-prio thread vruntime is 1505ms
pi-vruntime-tes-598 [001] dN.. 520.573966: sched_stat_runtime:
comm=pi-vruntime-tes pid=598 runtime=20150 [ns] vruntime=1505797560 [ns]
The program:
/*
* Test case for vruntime management during rtmutex priority inheritance
* promotion and demotion.
*
* build with -lpthread
*/
#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include <pthread.h>
#include <semaphore.h>
#include <sched.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#define ERROR_CHECK(x) \
if (x) \
fprintf(stderr, "Error at line %d", __LINE__);
pthread_mutex_t pi_mutex;
sem_t a_sem;
sem_t b_sem;
void *rt_thread_func(void *arg) {
int policy;
int i = 0;
cpu_set_t cpuset;
CPU_ZERO(&cpuset);
CPU_SET(0, &cpuset);
ERROR_CHECK(pthread_setaffinity_np(pthread_self(),
sizeof(cpu_set_t),
&cpuset));
while(i++ < 100) {
sem_wait(&b_sem);
usleep(1000);
sem_post(&a_sem);
pthread_mutex_lock(&pi_mutex);
pthread_mutex_unlock(&pi_mutex);
}
}
void *low_prio_thread_func(void *arg) {
int i = 0;
cpu_set_t cpuset;
CPU_ZERO(&cpuset);
CPU_SET(1, &cpuset);
ERROR_CHECK(pthread_setaffinity_np(pthread_self(),
sizeof(cpu_set_t),
&cpuset));
while(i++ < 100) {
pthread_mutex_lock(&pi_mutex);
sem_post(&b_sem);
sem_wait(&a_sem);
pthread_mutex_unlock(&pi_mutex);
}
}
int main()
{
pthread_t rt_thread;
pthread_t low_prio_thread;
pthread_attr_t rt_thread_attrs;
pthread_attr_t low_prio_thread_attrs;
struct sched_param rt_thread_sched_params;
struct sched_param low_prio_thread_sched_params;
pthread_mutexattr_t mutex_attrs;
sem_init(&a_sem, 0, 0);
sem_init(&b_sem, 0, 0);
ERROR_CHECK(pthread_mutexattr_init(&mutex_attrs));
ERROR_CHECK(pthread_mutexattr_setprotocol(&mutex_attrs,
PTHREAD_PRIO_INHERIT));
ERROR_CHECK(pthread_mutex_init(&pi_mutex, &mutex_attrs));
rt_thread_sched_params.sched_priority = 80;
low_prio_thread_sched_params.sched_priority = 0;
pthread_attr_init(&rt_thread_attrs);
pthread_attr_init(&low_prio_thread_attrs);
ERROR_CHECK(pthread_attr_setinheritsched(&rt_thread_attrs,
PTHREAD_EXPLICIT_SCHED));
ERROR_CHECK(pthread_attr_setinheritsched(&low_prio_thread_attrs,
PTHREAD_EXPLICIT_SCHED));
ERROR_CHECK(pthread_attr_setschedpolicy(&rt_thread_attrs,
SCHED_FIFO));
ERROR_CHECK(pthread_attr_setschedpolicy(&low_prio_thread_attrs,
SCHED_OTHER));
ERROR_CHECK(pthread_attr_setschedparam(&rt_thread_attrs,
&rt_thread_sched_params));
ERROR_CHECK(pthread_attr_setschedparam(&low_prio_thread_attrs,
&low_prio_thread_sched_params));
ERROR_CHECK(pthread_create(&rt_thread, &rt_thread_attrs,
rt_thread_func, NULL));
ERROR_CHECK(pthread_create(&low_prio_thread,
&low_prio_thread_attrs,
low_prio_thread_func, NULL));
ERROR_CHECK(pthread_join(rt_thread, NULL));
ERROR_CHECK(pthread_join(low_prio_thread, NULL));
return 0;
}