| /openbmc/linux/kernel/sched/ |
| H A D | deadline.c | 67dfa1b7 Mon Oct 27 09:40:52 CDT 2014 Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@parallels.com> sched/deadline: Implement cancel_dl_timer() to use in switched_from_dl()
Currently used hrtimer_try_to_cancel() is racy:
raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock)
... dl_task_timer raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock)
... raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock) ...
switched_from_dl() ... ...
hrtimer_try_to_cancel() ... ...
switched_to_fair() ... ...
... ... ...
... ... ...
raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock) ... (asquired)
... ... ...
... ... ...
do_exit() ... ...
schedule() ... ...
raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock) ... raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock)
... ... ...
raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock) ... raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock)
... ... (asquired)
put_task_struct() ... ...
free_task_struct() ... ...
... ... raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock)
... (asquired) ...
... ... ...
... (use after free) ...
So, let's implement 100% guaranteed way to cancel the timer and let's
be sure we are safe even in very unlikely situations.
rq unlocking does not limit the area of switched_from_dl() use, because
this has already been possible in pull_dl_task() below.
Let's consider the safety of of this unlocking. New code in the patch
is working when hrtimer_try_to_cancel() fails. This means the callback
is running. In this case hrtimer_cancel() is just waiting till the
callback is finished. Two
1) Since we are in switched_from_dl(), new class is not dl_sched_class and
new prio is not less MAX_DL_PRIO. So, the callback returns early; it's
right after !dl_task() check. After that hrtimer_cancel() returns back too.
The above is:
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
... dl_task_timer()
... raw_spin_lock(rq->lock);
switched_from_dl() ...
hrtimer_try_to_cancel() ...
raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock); ...
hrtimer_cancel() ...
... raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock);
... return HRTIMER_NORESTART;
... ...
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
2) But the below is also possible:
dl_task_timer()
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock);
...
raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock);
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
switched_from_dl() ...
hrtimer_try_to_cancel() ...
... return HRTIMER_NORESTART;
raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock); ...
hrtimer_cancel(); ...
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
In this case hrtimer_cancel() returns immediately. Very unlikely case,
just to mention.
Nobody can manipulate the task, because check_class_changed() is
always called with pi_lock locked. Nobody can force the task to
participate in (concurrent) priority inheritance schemes (the same reason).
All concurrent task operations require pi_lock, which is held by us.
No deadlocks with dl_task_timer() are possible, because it returns
right after !dl_task() check (it does nothing).
If we receive a new dl_task during the time of unlocked rq, we just
don't have to do pull_dl_task() in switched_from_dl() further.
Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@parallels.com>
[ Added comments]
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1414420852.19914.186.camel@tkhai
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
67dfa1b7 Mon Oct 27 09:40:52 CDT 2014 Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@parallels.com> sched/deadline: Implement cancel_dl_timer() to use in switched_from_dl()
Currently used hrtimer_try_to_cancel() is racy:
raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock)
... dl_task_timer raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock)
... raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock) ...
switched_from_dl() ... ...
hrtimer_try_to_cancel() ... ...
switched_to_fair() ... ...
... ... ...
... ... ...
raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock) ... (asquired)
... ... ...
... ... ...
do_exit() ... ...
schedule() ... ...
raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock) ... raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock)
... ... ...
raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock) ... raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock)
... ... (asquired)
put_task_struct() ... ...
free_task_struct() ... ...
... ... raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock)
... (asquired) ...
... ... ...
... (use after free) ...
So, let's implement 100% guaranteed way to cancel the timer and let's
be sure we are safe even in very unlikely situations.
rq unlocking does not limit the area of switched_from_dl() use, because
this has already been possible in pull_dl_task() below.
Let's consider the safety of of this unlocking. New code in the patch
is working when hrtimer_try_to_cancel() fails. This means the callback
is running. In this case hrtimer_cancel() is just waiting till the
callback is finished. Two
1) Since we are in switched_from_dl(), new class is not dl_sched_class and
new prio is not less MAX_DL_PRIO. So, the callback returns early; it's
right after !dl_task() check. After that hrtimer_cancel() returns back too.
The above is:
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
... dl_task_timer()
... raw_spin_lock(rq->lock);
switched_from_dl() ...
hrtimer_try_to_cancel() ...
raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock); ...
hrtimer_cancel() ...
... raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock);
... return HRTIMER_NORESTART;
... ...
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
2) But the below is also possible:
dl_task_timer()
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock);
...
raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock);
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
switched_from_dl() ...
hrtimer_try_to_cancel() ...
... return HRTIMER_NORESTART;
raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock); ...
hrtimer_cancel(); ...
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
In this case hrtimer_cancel() returns immediately. Very unlikely case,
just to mention.
Nobody can manipulate the task, because check_class_changed() is
always called with pi_lock locked. Nobody can force the task to
participate in (concurrent) priority inheritance schemes (the same reason).
All concurrent task operations require pi_lock, which is held by us.
No deadlocks with dl_task_timer() are possible, because it returns
right after !dl_task() check (it does nothing).
If we receive a new dl_task during the time of unlocked rq, we just
don't have to do pull_dl_task() in switched_from_dl() further.
Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@parallels.com>
[ Added comments]
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1414420852.19914.186.camel@tkhai
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
|
| H A D | sched.h | 67dfa1b7 Mon Oct 27 09:40:52 CDT 2014 Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@parallels.com> sched/deadline: Implement cancel_dl_timer() to use in switched_from_dl()
Currently used hrtimer_try_to_cancel() is racy:
raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock)
... dl_task_timer raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock)
... raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock) ...
switched_from_dl() ... ...
hrtimer_try_to_cancel() ... ...
switched_to_fair() ... ...
... ... ...
... ... ...
raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock) ... (asquired)
... ... ...
... ... ...
do_exit() ... ...
schedule() ... ...
raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock) ... raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock)
... ... ...
raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock) ... raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock)
... ... (asquired)
put_task_struct() ... ...
free_task_struct() ... ...
... ... raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock)
... (asquired) ...
... ... ...
... (use after free) ...
So, let's implement 100% guaranteed way to cancel the timer and let's
be sure we are safe even in very unlikely situations.
rq unlocking does not limit the area of switched_from_dl() use, because
this has already been possible in pull_dl_task() below.
Let's consider the safety of of this unlocking. New code in the patch
is working when hrtimer_try_to_cancel() fails. This means the callback
is running. In this case hrtimer_cancel() is just waiting till the
callback is finished. Two
1) Since we are in switched_from_dl(), new class is not dl_sched_class and
new prio is not less MAX_DL_PRIO. So, the callback returns early; it's
right after !dl_task() check. After that hrtimer_cancel() returns back too.
The above is:
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
... dl_task_timer()
... raw_spin_lock(rq->lock);
switched_from_dl() ...
hrtimer_try_to_cancel() ...
raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock); ...
hrtimer_cancel() ...
... raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock);
... return HRTIMER_NORESTART;
... ...
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
2) But the below is also possible:
dl_task_timer()
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock);
...
raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock);
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
switched_from_dl() ...
hrtimer_try_to_cancel() ...
... return HRTIMER_NORESTART;
raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock); ...
hrtimer_cancel(); ...
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
In this case hrtimer_cancel() returns immediately. Very unlikely case,
just to mention.
Nobody can manipulate the task, because check_class_changed() is
always called with pi_lock locked. Nobody can force the task to
participate in (concurrent) priority inheritance schemes (the same reason).
All concurrent task operations require pi_lock, which is held by us.
No deadlocks with dl_task_timer() are possible, because it returns
right after !dl_task() check (it does nothing).
If we receive a new dl_task during the time of unlocked rq, we just
don't have to do pull_dl_task() in switched_from_dl() further.
Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@parallels.com>
[ Added comments]
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1414420852.19914.186.camel@tkhai
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
67dfa1b7 Mon Oct 27 09:40:52 CDT 2014 Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@parallels.com> sched/deadline: Implement cancel_dl_timer() to use in switched_from_dl()
Currently used hrtimer_try_to_cancel() is racy:
raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock)
... dl_task_timer raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock)
... raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock) ...
switched_from_dl() ... ...
hrtimer_try_to_cancel() ... ...
switched_to_fair() ... ...
... ... ...
... ... ...
raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock) ... (asquired)
... ... ...
... ... ...
do_exit() ... ...
schedule() ... ...
raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock) ... raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock)
... ... ...
raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock) ... raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock)
... ... (asquired)
put_task_struct() ... ...
free_task_struct() ... ...
... ... raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock)
... (asquired) ...
... ... ...
... (use after free) ...
So, let's implement 100% guaranteed way to cancel the timer and let's
be sure we are safe even in very unlikely situations.
rq unlocking does not limit the area of switched_from_dl() use, because
this has already been possible in pull_dl_task() below.
Let's consider the safety of of this unlocking. New code in the patch
is working when hrtimer_try_to_cancel() fails. This means the callback
is running. In this case hrtimer_cancel() is just waiting till the
callback is finished. Two
1) Since we are in switched_from_dl(), new class is not dl_sched_class and
new prio is not less MAX_DL_PRIO. So, the callback returns early; it's
right after !dl_task() check. After that hrtimer_cancel() returns back too.
The above is:
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
... dl_task_timer()
... raw_spin_lock(rq->lock);
switched_from_dl() ...
hrtimer_try_to_cancel() ...
raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock); ...
hrtimer_cancel() ...
... raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock);
... return HRTIMER_NORESTART;
... ...
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
2) But the below is also possible:
dl_task_timer()
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock);
...
raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock);
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
switched_from_dl() ...
hrtimer_try_to_cancel() ...
... return HRTIMER_NORESTART;
raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock); ...
hrtimer_cancel(); ...
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
In this case hrtimer_cancel() returns immediately. Very unlikely case,
just to mention.
Nobody can manipulate the task, because check_class_changed() is
always called with pi_lock locked. Nobody can force the task to
participate in (concurrent) priority inheritance schemes (the same reason).
All concurrent task operations require pi_lock, which is held by us.
No deadlocks with dl_task_timer() are possible, because it returns
right after !dl_task() check (it does nothing).
If we receive a new dl_task during the time of unlocked rq, we just
don't have to do pull_dl_task() in switched_from_dl() further.
Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@parallels.com>
[ Added comments]
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1414420852.19914.186.camel@tkhai
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
|
| H A D | core.c | 67dfa1b7 Mon Oct 27 09:40:52 CDT 2014 Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@parallels.com> sched/deadline: Implement cancel_dl_timer() to use in switched_from_dl()
Currently used hrtimer_try_to_cancel() is racy:
raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock)
... dl_task_timer raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock)
... raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock) ...
switched_from_dl() ... ...
hrtimer_try_to_cancel() ... ...
switched_to_fair() ... ...
... ... ...
... ... ...
raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock) ... (asquired)
... ... ...
... ... ...
do_exit() ... ...
schedule() ... ...
raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock) ... raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock)
... ... ...
raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock) ... raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock)
... ... (asquired)
put_task_struct() ... ...
free_task_struct() ... ...
... ... raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock)
... (asquired) ...
... ... ...
... (use after free) ...
So, let's implement 100% guaranteed way to cancel the timer and let's
be sure we are safe even in very unlikely situations.
rq unlocking does not limit the area of switched_from_dl() use, because
this has already been possible in pull_dl_task() below.
Let's consider the safety of of this unlocking. New code in the patch
is working when hrtimer_try_to_cancel() fails. This means the callback
is running. In this case hrtimer_cancel() is just waiting till the
callback is finished. Two
1) Since we are in switched_from_dl(), new class is not dl_sched_class and
new prio is not less MAX_DL_PRIO. So, the callback returns early; it's
right after !dl_task() check. After that hrtimer_cancel() returns back too.
The above is:
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
... dl_task_timer()
... raw_spin_lock(rq->lock);
switched_from_dl() ...
hrtimer_try_to_cancel() ...
raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock); ...
hrtimer_cancel() ...
... raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock);
... return HRTIMER_NORESTART;
... ...
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
2) But the below is also possible:
dl_task_timer()
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock);
...
raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock);
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
switched_from_dl() ...
hrtimer_try_to_cancel() ...
... return HRTIMER_NORESTART;
raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock); ...
hrtimer_cancel(); ...
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
In this case hrtimer_cancel() returns immediately. Very unlikely case,
just to mention.
Nobody can manipulate the task, because check_class_changed() is
always called with pi_lock locked. Nobody can force the task to
participate in (concurrent) priority inheritance schemes (the same reason).
All concurrent task operations require pi_lock, which is held by us.
No deadlocks with dl_task_timer() are possible, because it returns
right after !dl_task() check (it does nothing).
If we receive a new dl_task during the time of unlocked rq, we just
don't have to do pull_dl_task() in switched_from_dl() further.
Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@parallels.com>
[ Added comments]
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1414420852.19914.186.camel@tkhai
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
67dfa1b7 Mon Oct 27 09:40:52 CDT 2014 Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@parallels.com> sched/deadline: Implement cancel_dl_timer() to use in switched_from_dl()
Currently used hrtimer_try_to_cancel() is racy:
raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock)
... dl_task_timer raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock)
... raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock) ...
switched_from_dl() ... ...
hrtimer_try_to_cancel() ... ...
switched_to_fair() ... ...
... ... ...
... ... ...
raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock) ... (asquired)
... ... ...
... ... ...
do_exit() ... ...
schedule() ... ...
raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock) ... raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock)
... ... ...
raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock) ... raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock)
... ... (asquired)
put_task_struct() ... ...
free_task_struct() ... ...
... ... raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock)
... (asquired) ...
... ... ...
... (use after free) ...
So, let's implement 100% guaranteed way to cancel the timer and let's
be sure we are safe even in very unlikely situations.
rq unlocking does not limit the area of switched_from_dl() use, because
this has already been possible in pull_dl_task() below.
Let's consider the safety of of this unlocking. New code in the patch
is working when hrtimer_try_to_cancel() fails. This means the callback
is running. In this case hrtimer_cancel() is just waiting till the
callback is finished. Two
1) Since we are in switched_from_dl(), new class is not dl_sched_class and
new prio is not less MAX_DL_PRIO. So, the callback returns early; it's
right after !dl_task() check. After that hrtimer_cancel() returns back too.
The above is:
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
... dl_task_timer()
... raw_spin_lock(rq->lock);
switched_from_dl() ...
hrtimer_try_to_cancel() ...
raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock); ...
hrtimer_cancel() ...
... raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock);
... return HRTIMER_NORESTART;
... ...
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
2) But the below is also possible:
dl_task_timer()
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock);
...
raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock);
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
switched_from_dl() ...
hrtimer_try_to_cancel() ...
... return HRTIMER_NORESTART;
raw_spin_unlock(rq->lock); ...
hrtimer_cancel(); ...
raw_spin_lock(rq->lock); ...
In this case hrtimer_cancel() returns immediately. Very unlikely case,
just to mention.
Nobody can manipulate the task, because check_class_changed() is
always called with pi_lock locked. Nobody can force the task to
participate in (concurrent) priority inheritance schemes (the same reason).
All concurrent task operations require pi_lock, which is held by us.
No deadlocks with dl_task_timer() are possible, because it returns
right after !dl_task() check (it does nothing).
If we receive a new dl_task during the time of unlocked rq, we just
don't have to do pull_dl_task() in switched_from_dl() further.
Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@parallels.com>
[ Added comments]
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1414420852.19914.186.camel@tkhai
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
|