Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   "Zhang, Qiang1" <qiang1.zhang@intel.com>
To:     Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
CC:     "paulmck@kernel.org" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
        "joel@joelfernandes.org" <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
        "rcu@vger.kernel.org" <rcu@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] rcu: Avoid invalid wakeup for rcuc kthreads in
 RCU_KTHREAD_OFFCPU status
Thread-Topic: [PATCH] rcu: Avoid invalid wakeup for rcuc kthreads in
 RCU_KTHREAD_OFFCPU status
Thread-Index: AQHY+PQlxGZ/hW5SmUe9kA4qPJUqOq5BgTQAgAARpnA=
Date:   Wed, 16 Nov 2022 14:07:28 +0000
Message-ID: <PH0PR11MB5880FD7499114743BCE3E5A3DA079@PH0PR11MB5880.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <20221115131926.3409974-1-qiang1.zhang@intel.com>
 <20221116124716.GA813995@lothringen>
In-Reply-To: <20221116124716.GA813995@lothringen>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
dlp-product: dlpe-windows
dlp-version: 11.6.500.17
dlp-reaction: no-action
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-chunkcount: 1
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-0: =?us-ascii?Q?hF213PHs/2p7gtPSfGmWaW1qUCVwUC0UcOb6idLEaSG48tOnW7ZuNidfBUne?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?6X+9dZ4oG+uec0wrrVehPuERR+UA2tn8HwAqOYmSAH+9WokY7urhaLmQagFi?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?XLFNx/3USKLS16Yw55AE1AiRo56cWHFNdgLTPCsEZe36QyTqBKNnVJ7d0Jfs?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?ZaX5FKCsjbYO0eNnScm8fkCafu1GZzgjQl+yNTOuXoTN8Cs5FckIM2AlwoGQ?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?KjP+b/JEmmcrbwhJjI0Ra0tGu15EMg1DuV4nVNAiEipH9tz6DBOy8tJ8yrjC?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?nMpuDjLpi35nyXnGLGto5qNeFs+CLF1AtDQMxkjhmmGwMZT099pSUInb0WSb?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?aGgeI1qT+uVGNWU+VceGV5U90xjqU2C+YWOl7OlCKbqixyIzNclZtP+3ylUa?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?kGkgzue+BhrnFxu6AtNR//iQXqnO9geyMvg2HAAwzHGrIsA53v6vibJ5Deu+?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?SqsgritVrOZbIezFBkyyUj2M+J7JYXbvtT2TqZUPuEL59Y8ffc+Q+LdBhlbi?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?EH6C3H2zhlWtAhyPI/t3x9Mz4BKi2FjPAm4u7jco8mByKbJCCiHV3g5EiaEt?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?RiEtfPXgNYbJaiGLRPkrVJYZUo7XmdIw6zQq3TRFy16RwGVrFr6C1M9v5ZAC?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?3+pguz1gpHDfyxZo0cBb1KALRj/zOR96rLvkBlX2yuP9b0pItS3U6kYWQ4ox?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?IsBt8BZJoXKI4nq05z3us1cKjNr11INGMs6YmVJaXmWU7gyq+Hafz4f1nOGR?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?p4ur88S1eyTpjoG/YOy7TMtq/NfIM2UE7NLgb0EuaMx1fpvsAkIfqBqOjjzg?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?Tw6OOkpiW76DBItjE9z0PN1A78i04Y3UyOslU6CD/HUVuz9KEgSZgrYLVz6Z?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?JW2YYBBKemeLtK6LgrNvxCzZnKC/FRsSXS+rl+SB9mRVu82NX1djKCEqfq2e?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?kNIYFoqE9qysQnO+zqOEr+p0r/F5wwQ+1GQwrJFJJ3mtZa5zRkMshCiVXDCV?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?2iqnxdSnjQ+Ux39XzHOLgcBBXmo0KX+FnRtpyBjCyu6QoojcV+sk8DuKVnmQ?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?c9RJiSMep1GKE9b8Ube9rzUAuT3XpuhqPee1X0ti2VTdCMtYX+OwthdtSAto?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?jRgTGwvfH+X896og5Kwlls8/muHQVWrGUxitPdyZnshQJHNf9rFG1Se9rfGt?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?XxDJnFoLJYEksYZRog1/9fu6h9oQs+CACNGUOwQkMvB6Y4Vs1HW35MEv4PYM?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?PfR5gOjIqjS5SFyMCstjzjnFLWXRK03eeyIwceEb48A3E+eOhWaX5cy6+3xL?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?eOs3KQ/2yvKIV/AJl1P8fSixRKW0G2j1ZHm4GxT7WESrGPiDcFN4PMM1jOQY?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?9ty7c/OpaDUmEg5ZLwOCsYxUz+Sf+cm/Am3HsGJV/BBcy1p6LRX3r5+xBxPB?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?d9ybsknpCFbfq8yFjh9io0Dzv1etlbBqNf3Tg8rdcpdy/m66FGHboT27pYBd?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?H3Axef9AYLrqsl+P62osgXXz0G1dR5t0Tu95YKmYZoX+Oh/SK4k1CNNNxIxP?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?mBHvJm2/fgQqxh10Fumcrbet3LOX/GqhuABH9q5k?=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: PH0PR11MB5880.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: a10cecde-9214-4412-b1d3-08dac7dbe5a4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 16 Nov 2022 14:07:29.0731
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 46c98d88-e344-4ed4-8496-4ed7712e255d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: 6UipL9qny9GM+OiFxY0vIexPBSixyYQVcWbmwgFtFkpegRxa7nGm4qrwb7WYEhSRSIPN5CsSspk0Nif5vjKVvQ==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BL3PR11MB6316
X-OriginatorOrg: intel.com
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,
        DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,
        RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE
        autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
        lindbergh.monkeyblade.net
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 09:19:26PM +0800, Zqiang wrote:
> For CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT=3Dy kernel, the "use_softirq=3D0" will be set, the
> RCU_SOFTIRQ processing is moved to per-CPU rcuc kthreads which created
> by smpboot_register_percpu_thread(). when CPU is going offline, the
> corresponding rcu_data.rcu_cpu_kthread_status is set RCU_KTHREAD_OFFCPU,
> and the rcuc kthreads enter TASK_PARKED state, kthreads in TASK_PARKED
> state only accept kthread_unpark() to wakeup.
>=20
> Therefore, This commit avoid invoke wake_up_process() to rcuc kthreads
> in TASK_PARKED state.
>=20
> Signed-off-by: Zqiang <qiang1.zhang@intel.com>
> ---
>  kernel/rcu/tree.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>=20
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> index 3ccad468887e..49dd87356851 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> @@ -2375,7 +2375,8 @@ static void rcu_wake_cond(struct task_struct *t, in=
t status)
>  	 * If the thread is yielding, only wake it when this
>  	 * is invoked from idle
>  	 */
> -	if (t && (status !=3D RCU_KTHREAD_YIELDING || is_idle_task(current)))
> +	if (t && (status !=3D RCU_KTHREAD_YIELDING || is_idle_task(current)) &&
> +				status !=3D RCU_KTHREAD_OFFCPU)
>  		wake_up_process(t);

>There is a tiny window where this can happen (between CPUHP_TEARDOWN_CPU
>and CPUHP_AP_SMPBOOT_THREADS) and it can't cause a spurious unpark because
>wake_up_process() only wakes up from TASK_[UN]INTERRUPTIBLE states. And ev=
en
>if it did, the KTHREAD_SHOULD_PARK bit would still be on.

Yes even if it did, because KTHREAD_SHOULD_PARK bit would still be on, this=
 kthreads
will schedule out again.

>
>And more important! On unpark time RCU_KTHREAD_OFFCPU isn't cleared. Only =
the
>rcuc kthread does it, and after your patch it couldn't be awaken to perfor=
m
>that, unless rcuc is lucky enough to have rcu_data.rcu_cpu_has_work =3D 1
>by the time it unparks and that isn't guaranteed. So rcuc may sleep foreve=
r.

Thanks for review, yes I should register an unpark function to clear RCU_KT=
HREAD_OFFCPU.
Is the following modification more appropriate?

diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
index 3ccad468887e..a2248af0ccda 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
@@ -2375,7 +2375,8 @@ static void rcu_wake_cond(struct task_struct *t, int =
status)
         * If the thread is yielding, only wake it when this
         * is invoked from idle
         */
-       if (t && (status !=3D RCU_KTHREAD_YIELDING || is_idle_task(current)=
))
+       if (t && (status !=3D RCU_KTHREAD_YIELDING || is_idle_task(current)=
) &&
+                               status !=3D RCU_KTHREAD_OFFCPU)
                wake_up_process(t);
 }

@@ -2407,7 +2408,14 @@ static void invoke_rcu_core(void)

 static void rcu_cpu_kthread_park(unsigned int cpu)
 {
-       per_cpu(rcu_data.rcu_cpu_kthread_status, cpu) =3D RCU_KTHREAD_OFFCP=
U;
+       WARN_ON_ONCE(cpu !=3D smp_processor_id());
+       __this_cpu_write(rcu_data.rcu_cpu_kthread_status, RCU_KTHREAD_OFFCP=
U);
+}
+
+static void rcu_cpu_kthread_unpark(unsigned int cpu)
+{
+       WARN_ON_ONCE(cpu !=3D smp_processor_id());
+       __this_cpu_write(rcu_data.rcu_cpu_kthread_status, RCU_KTHREAD_ONCPU=
);
 }

 static int rcu_cpu_kthread_should_run(unsigned int cpu)
@@ -2460,6 +2468,7 @@ static struct smp_hotplug_thread rcu_cpu_thread_spec =
=3D {
        .thread_comm            =3D "rcuc/%u",
        .setup                  =3D rcu_cpu_kthread_setup,
        .park                   =3D rcu_cpu_kthread_park,
+       .unpark                 =3D rcu_cpu_kthread_unpark,=20
};

 /*
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.h b/kernel/rcu/tree.h
index fcb5d696eb17..c4b9606968db 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.h
@@ -36,8 +36,9 @@ struct rcu_exp_work {
 #define RCU_KTHREAD_RUNNING  1
 #define RCU_KTHREAD_WAITING  2
 #define RCU_KTHREAD_OFFCPU   3
-#define RCU_KTHREAD_YIELDING 4
-#define RCU_KTHREAD_MAX      4
+#define RCU_KTHREAD_ONCPU    4
+#define RCU_KTHREAD_YIELDING 5
+#define RCU_KTHREAD_MAX      5


Thanks
Zqiang

>
>OTOH one cleanup that could be done is to make rcu_cpu_kthread_park() to u=
se
>__this_cpu_write as it's guaranteed that cpu =3D=3D smp_processor_id().
>
>Thanks.