Commit c20cf065 authored by Peter Zijlstra's avatar Peter Zijlstra Committed by Ingo Molnar

sched: Simplify migration_cpu_stop()

When affine_move_task() issues a migration_cpu_stop(), the purpose of
that function is to complete that @pending, not any random other
p->migration_pending that might have gotten installed since.

This realization much simplifies migration_cpu_stop() and allows
further necessary steps to fix all this as it provides the guarantee
that @pending's stopper will complete @pending (and not some random
other @pending).

Fixes: 6d337eab ("sched: Fix migrate_disable() vs set_cpus_allowed_ptr()")
Cc: stable@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: default avatarPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: default avatarIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: default avatarValentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210224131355.430014682@infradead.org
parent 8a6edb52
......@@ -1898,8 +1898,8 @@ static struct rq *__migrate_task(struct rq *rq, struct rq_flags *rf,
*/
static int migration_cpu_stop(void *data)
{
struct set_affinity_pending *pending;
struct migration_arg *arg = data;
struct set_affinity_pending *pending = arg->pending;
struct task_struct *p = arg->task;
int dest_cpu = arg->dest_cpu;
struct rq *rq = this_rq();
......@@ -1921,25 +1921,6 @@ static int migration_cpu_stop(void *data)
raw_spin_lock(&p->pi_lock);
rq_lock(rq, &rf);
pending = p->migration_pending;
if (pending && !arg->pending) {
/*
* This happens from sched_exec() and migrate_task_to(),
* neither of them care about pending and just want a task to
* maybe move about.
*
* Even if there is a pending, we can ignore it, since
* affine_move_task() will have it's own stop_work's in flight
* which will manage the completion.
*
* Notably, pending doesn't need to match arg->pending. This can
* happen when tripple concurrent affine_move_task() first sets
* pending, then clears pending and eventually sets another
* pending.
*/
pending = NULL;
}
/*
* If task_rq(p) != rq, it cannot be migrated here, because we're
* holding rq->lock, if p->on_rq == 0 it cannot get enqueued because
......@@ -1950,31 +1931,20 @@ static int migration_cpu_stop(void *data)
goto out;
if (pending) {
p->migration_pending = NULL;
if (p->migration_pending == pending)
p->migration_pending = NULL;
complete = true;
}
/* migrate_enable() -- we must not race against SCA */
if (dest_cpu < 0) {
/*
* When this was migrate_enable() but we no longer
* have a @pending, a concurrent SCA 'fixed' things
* and we should be valid again. Nothing to do.
*/
if (!pending) {
WARN_ON_ONCE(!cpumask_test_cpu(task_cpu(p), &p->cpus_mask));
goto out;
}
if (dest_cpu < 0)
dest_cpu = cpumask_any_distribute(&p->cpus_mask);
}
if (task_on_rq_queued(p))
rq = __migrate_task(rq, &rf, p, dest_cpu);
else
p->wake_cpu = dest_cpu;
} else if (dest_cpu < 0 || pending) {
} else if (pending) {
/*
* This happens when we get migrated between migrate_enable()'s
* preempt_enable() and scheduling the stopper task. At that
......@@ -1989,22 +1959,13 @@ static int migration_cpu_stop(void *data)
* ->pi_lock, so the allowed mask is stable - if it got
* somewhere allowed, we're done.
*/
if (pending && cpumask_test_cpu(task_cpu(p), p->cpus_ptr)) {
p->migration_pending = NULL;
if (cpumask_test_cpu(task_cpu(p), p->cpus_ptr)) {
if (p->migration_pending == pending)
p->migration_pending = NULL;
complete = true;
goto out;
}
/*
* When this was migrate_enable() but we no longer have an
* @pending, a concurrent SCA 'fixed' things and we should be
* valid again. Nothing to do.
*/
if (!pending) {
WARN_ON_ONCE(!cpumask_test_cpu(task_cpu(p), &p->cpus_mask));
goto out;
}
/*
* When migrate_enable() hits a rq mis-match we can't reliably
* determine is_migration_disabled() and so have to chase after
......@@ -2022,7 +1983,6 @@ static int migration_cpu_stop(void *data)
complete_all(&pending->done);
/* For pending->{arg,stop_work} */
pending = arg->pending;
if (pending && refcount_dec_and_test(&pending->refs))
wake_up_var(&pending->refs);
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment