Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 27 Oct 2020 10:14:59 -0400 | From | Joel Fernandes <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v8 -tip 02/26] sched: Introduce sched_class::pick_task() |
| |
On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 08:27:16AM -0400, Vineeth Pillai wrote: > > > On 10/24/20 7:10 AM, Vineeth Pillai wrote: > > > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c > > index 93a3b874077d..4cae5ac48b60 100644 > > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c > > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c > > @@ -4428,12 +4428,14 @@ pick_next_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct > > sched_entity *curr) > > se = second; > > } > > > > - if (cfs_rq->next && wakeup_preempt_entity(cfs_rq->next, left) < > > 1) { > > + if (left && cfs_rq->next && > > + wakeup_preempt_entity(cfs_rq->next, left) < 1) { > > /* > > * Someone really wants this to run. If it's not unfair, > > run it. > > */ > > se = cfs_rq->next; > > - } else if (cfs_rq->last && wakeup_preempt_entity(cfs_rq->last, > > left) < 1) { > > + } else if (left && cfs_rq->last && > > + wakeup_preempt_entity(cfs_rq->last, left) < 1) { > > /* > > * Prefer last buddy, try to return the CPU to a > > preempted task. > > > > > > There reason for left being NULL needs to be investigated. This was > > there from v1 and we did not yet get to it. I shall try to debug later > > this week. > > Thinking more about it and looking at the crash, I think that > 'left == NULL' can happen in pick_next_entity for core scheduling. > If a cfs_rq has only one task that is running, then it will be > dequeued and 'left = __pick_first_entity()' will be NULL as the > cfs_rq will be empty. This would not happen outside of coresched > because we never call pick_tack() before put_prev_task() which > will enqueue the task back. > > With core scheduling, a cpu can call pick_task() for its sibling while > the sibling is still running the active task and put_prev_task has yet > not been called. This can result in 'left == NULL'. So I think the > above fix is appropriate when core scheduling is active. It could be > cleaned up a bit though.
Thanks a lot Vineeth! Just add, the pick_next_entity() returning NULL still causes pick_task_fair() to behave correctly. Because pick_task_fair() will return 'curr' to the core-wide picking code, not NULL. The problem is CFS pick_next_entity() is not able to handle it though and crash, as Vineeth found the below hunk got lost in the rebase:
@@ -4464,13 +4464,13 @@ pick_next_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *curr) /* * Prefer last buddy, try to return the CPU to a preempted task. */ - if (cfs_rq->last && wakeup_preempt_entity(cfs_rq->last, left) < 1) + if (left && cfs_rq->last && wakeup_preempt_entity(cfs_rq->last, left) < 1) se = cfs_rq->last;
/* * Someone really wants this to run. If it's not unfair, run it. */ - if (cfs_rq->next && wakeup_preempt_entity(cfs_rq->next, left) < 1) + if (left && cfs_rq->next && wakeup_preempt_entity(cfs_rq->next, left) < 1) se = cfs_rq->next;
clear_buddies(cfs_rq, se);
Peter's fix in the other email looks good and I will include that for testing before the next posting.
thanks,
- Joel
| |