Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:35:45 +0100
From:   Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
To:     Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 5.6-rc3: WARNING: CPU: 48 PID: 17435 at kernel/sched/fair.c:380
 enqueue_task_fair+0x328/0x440
Message-ID: <20200228163545.GA18662@vingu-book>
References: <ace7327f-0fd6-4f36-39ae-a8d7d1c7f06b@de.ibm.com>
 <afacbbd1-3d6b-c537-34e2-5b455e1c2267@de.ibm.com>
 <CAKfTPtBikHzpHY-NdRJFfOFxx+S3=4Y0aPM5s0jpHs40+9BaGA@mail.gmail.com>
 <b073a50e-4b86-56db-3fbd-6869b2716b34@de.ibm.com>
 <1a607a98-f12a-77bd-2062-c3e599614331@de.ibm.com>
 <CAKfTPtBZ2X8i6zMgrA1gNJmwoSnyRc76yXmLZEwboJmF-R9QVg@mail.gmail.com>
 <b664f050-72d6-a483-be0a-8504f687f225@de.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <b664f050-72d6-a483-be0a-8504f687f225@de.ibm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Le vendredi 28 f?vr. 2020 ? 16:42:27 (+0100), Christian Borntraeger a ?crit :
> 
> 
> On 28.02.20 16:37, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > On Fri, 28 Feb 2020 at 16:08, Christian Borntraeger
> > <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Also happened with 5.4:
> >> Seems that I just happen to have an interesting test workload/system size interaction
> >> on a newly installed system that triggers this.
> > 
> > you will probably go back to 5.1 which is the version where we put
> > back the deletion of unused cfs_rq from the list which can trigger the
> > warning:
> > commit 039ae8bcf7a5 : (Fix O(nr_cgroups) in the load balancing path)
> > 
> > AFAICT, we haven't changed this since
> 
> So you do know what is the problem? If not is there any debug option or
> patch that I could apply to give you more information?

No I don't?know what is happening. Your test probably goes through?an unexpected path

Would it be difficult for me to reproduce your test env ?

There is an optimization in the code which could generate problem if assumption is not
true. Could you try the patch below ?

---
 kernel/sched/fair.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 3c8a379c357e..beb773c23e7d 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -4035,8 +4035,8 @@ enqueue_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se, int flags)
 		__enqueue_entity(cfs_rq, se);
 	se->on_rq = 1;
 
+	list_add_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
 	if (cfs_rq->nr_running == 1) {
-		list_add_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
 		check_enqueue_throttle(cfs_rq);
 	}
 }
-- 
2.17.1


>