linux-toradex.git/kernel/sched, branch v5.3-rc7

Merge branch 'sched-urgent-for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip

2019-08-25T17:06:12+00:00

Pull scheduler fix from Thomas Gleixner:
 "Handle the worker management in situations where a task is scheduled
  out on a PI lock contention correctly and schedule a new worker if
  possible"

* 'sched-urgent-for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip:
  sched/core: Schedule new worker even if PI-blocked

psi: get poll_work to run when calling poll syscall next time

2019-08-25T02:48:42+00:00

Only when calling the poll syscall the first time can user receive
POLLPRI correctly.  After that, user always fails to acquire the event
signal.

Reproduce case:
 1. Get the monitor code in Documentation/accounting/psi.txt
 2. Run it, and wait for the event triggered.
 3. Kill and restart the process.

The question is why we can end up with poll_scheduled = 1 but the work
not running (which would reset it to 0).  And the answer is because the
scheduling side sees group->poll_kworker under RCU protection and then
schedules it, but here we cancel the work and destroy the worker.  The
cancel needs to pair with resetting the poll_scheduled flag.

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1566357985-97781-1-git-send-email-joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com
Signed-off-by: Jason Xing 
Signed-off-by: Joseph Qi 
Reviewed-by: Caspar Zhang 
Reviewed-by: Suren Baghdasaryan 
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner 
Cc: Ingo Molnar 
Cc: Peter Zijlstra 
Cc: 
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton 
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

sched/core: Schedule new worker even if PI-blocked

2019-08-19T08:57:26+00:00

If a task is PI-blocked (blocking on sleeping spinlock) then we don't want to
schedule a new kworker if we schedule out due to lock contention because !RT
does not do that as well. A spinning spinlock disables preemption and a worker
does not schedule out on lock contention (but spin).

On RT the RW-semaphore implementation uses an rtmutex so
tsk_is_pi_blocked() will return true if a task blocks on it. In this case we
will now start a new worker which may deadlock if one worker is waiting on
progress from another worker. Since a RW-semaphore starts a new worker on !RT,
we should do the same on RT.

XFS is able to trigger this deadlock.

Allow to schedule new worker if the current worker is PI-blocked.

Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 
Cc: Linus Torvalds 
Cc: Peter Zijlstra 
Cc: Thomas Gleixner 
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190816160626.12742-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar

Merge branch 'pm-cpufreq'

2019-08-16T12:24:51+00:00

* pm-cpufreq:
  cpufreq: schedutil: Don't skip freq update when limits change
  cpufreq: dev_pm_qos_update_request() can return 1 on success

cpufreq: schedutil: Don't skip freq update when limits change

2019-08-10T11:53:19+00:00

To avoid reducing the frequency of a CPU prematurely, we skip reducing
the frequency if the CPU had been busy recently.

This should not be done when the limits of the policy are changed, for
example due to thermal throttling. We should always get the frequency
within the new limits as soon as possible.

Trying to fix this by using only one flag, i.e. need_freq_update, can
lead to a race condition where the flag gets cleared without forcing us
to change the frequency at least once. And so this patch introduces
another flag to avoid that race condition.

Fixes: ecd288429126 ("cpufreq: schedutil: Don't set next_freq to UINT_MAX")
Cc: v4.18+  # v4.18+
Reported-by: Doug Smythies 
Tested-by: Doug Smythies 
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar 
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

sched/psi: Do not require setsched permission from the trigger creator

2019-08-06T10:49:18+00:00

When a process creates a new trigger by writing into /proc/pressure/*
files, permissions to write such a file should be used to determine whether
the process is allowed to do so or not. Current implementation would also
require such a process to have setsched capability. Setting of psi trigger
thread's scheduling policy is an implementation detail and should not be
exposed to the user level. Remove the permission check by using _nocheck
version of the function.

Suggested-by: Nick Kralevich 
Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Cc: lizefan@huawei.com
Cc: mingo@redhat.com
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: kernel-team@android.com
Cc: dennisszhou@gmail.com
Cc: dennis@kernel.org
Cc: hannes@cmpxchg.org
Cc: axboe@kernel.dk
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190730013310.162367-1-surenb@google.com

sched/psi: Reduce psimon FIFO priority

2019-08-06T10:49:18+00:00

PSI defaults to a FIFO-99 thread, reduce this to FIFO-1.

FIFO-99 is the very highest priority available to SCHED_FIFO and
it not a suitable default; it would indicate the psi work is the
most important work on the machine.

Since Real-Time tasks will have pre-allocated memory and locked it in
place, Real-Time tasks do not care about PSI. All it needs is to be
above OTHER.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner 
Tested-by: Suren Baghdasaryan 
Cc: Thomas Gleixner

sched/deadline: Fix double accounting of rq/running bw in push & pull

2019-08-06T10:49:18+00:00

{push,pull}_dl_task() always calls {de,}activate_task() with .flags=0
which sets p->on_rq=TASK_ON_RQ_MIGRATING.

{push,pull}_dl_task()->{de,}activate_task()->{de,en}queue_task()->
{de,en}queue_task_dl() calls {sub,add}_{running,rq}_bw() since
p->on_rq==TASK_ON_RQ_MIGRATING.
So {sub,add}_{running,rq}_bw() in {push,pull}_dl_task() is
double-accounting for that task.

Fix it by removing rq/running bw accounting in [push/pull]_dl_task().

Fixes: 7dd778841164 ("sched/core: Unify p->on_rq updates")
Signed-off-by: Dietmar Eggemann 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Cc: Valentin Schneider 
Cc: Ingo Molnar 
Cc: Luca Abeni 
Cc: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira 
Cc: Juri Lelli 
Cc: Qais Yousef 
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190802145945.18702-2-dietmar.eggemann@arm.com

sched/fair: Use RCU accessors consistently for ->numa_group

2019-07-25T13:37:05+00:00

The old code used RCU annotations and accessors inconsistently for
->numa_group, which can lead to use-after-frees and NULL dereferences.

Let all accesses to ->numa_group use proper RCU helpers to prevent such
issues.

Signed-off-by: Jann Horn 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Cc: Linus Torvalds 
Cc: Peter Zijlstra 
Cc: Petr Mladek 
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky 
Cc: Thomas Gleixner 
Cc: Will Deacon 
Fixes: 8c8a743c5087 ("sched/numa: Use {cpu, pid} to create task groups for shared faults")
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190716152047.14424-3-jannh@google.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar

sched/fair: Don't free p->numa_faults with concurrent readers

2019-07-25T13:37:04+00:00

When going through execve(), zero out the NUMA fault statistics instead of
freeing them.

During execve, the task is reachable through procfs and the scheduler. A
concurrent /proc/*/sched reader can read data from a freed ->numa_faults
allocation (confirmed by KASAN) and write it back to userspace.
I believe that it would also be possible for a use-after-free read to occur
through a race between a NUMA fault and execve(): task_numa_fault() can
lead to task_numa_compare(), which invokes task_weight() on the currently
running task of a different CPU.

Another way to fix this would be to make ->numa_faults RCU-managed or add
extra locking, but it seems easier to wipe the NUMA fault statistics on
execve.

Signed-off-by: Jann Horn 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Cc: Linus Torvalds 
Cc: Peter Zijlstra 
Cc: Petr Mladek 
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky 
Cc: Thomas Gleixner 
Cc: Will Deacon 
Fixes: 82727018b0d3 ("sched/numa: Call task_numa_free() from do_execve()")
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190716152047.14424-1-jannh@google.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar