sched/fair: Fix enqueue_task_fair warning
commit fe61468b2c
upstream.
When a cfs rq is throttled, the latter and its child are removed from the
leaf list but their nr_running is not changed which includes staying higher
than 1. When a task is enqueued in this throttled branch, the cfs rqs must
be added back in order to ensure correct ordering in the list but this can
only happens if nr_running == 1.
When cfs bandwidth is used, we call unconditionnaly list_add_leaf_cfs_rq()
when enqueuing an entity to make sure that the complete branch will be
added.
Similarly unthrottle_cfs_rq() can stop adding cfs in the list when a parent
is throttled. Iterate the remaining entity to ensure that the complete
branch will be added in the list.
Reported-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Tested-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Tested-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org #v5.1+
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200306135257.25044-1-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
8b6f8619fc
commit
524089fa70
|
@ -3927,6 +3927,7 @@ static inline void check_schedstat_required(void)
|
|||
#endif
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
static inline bool cfs_bandwidth_used(void);
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* MIGRATION
|
||||
|
@ -4005,10 +4006,16 @@ enqueue_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se, int flags)
|
|||
__enqueue_entity(cfs_rq, se);
|
||||
se->on_rq = 1;
|
||||
|
||||
if (cfs_rq->nr_running == 1) {
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* When bandwidth control is enabled, cfs might have been removed
|
||||
* because of a parent been throttled but cfs->nr_running > 1. Try to
|
||||
* add it unconditionnally.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
if (cfs_rq->nr_running == 1 || cfs_bandwidth_used())
|
||||
list_add_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
|
||||
|
||||
if (cfs_rq->nr_running == 1)
|
||||
check_enqueue_throttle(cfs_rq);
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
static void __clear_buddies_last(struct sched_entity *se)
|
||||
|
@ -4589,11 +4596,22 @@ void unthrottle_cfs_rq(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
|
|||
break;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
assert_list_leaf_cfs_rq(rq);
|
||||
|
||||
if (!se)
|
||||
add_nr_running(rq, task_delta);
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* The cfs_rq_throttled() breaks in the above iteration can result in
|
||||
* incomplete leaf list maintenance, resulting in triggering the
|
||||
* assertion below.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
for_each_sched_entity(se) {
|
||||
cfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);
|
||||
|
||||
list_add_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
assert_list_leaf_cfs_rq(rq);
|
||||
|
||||
/* Determine whether we need to wake up potentially idle CPU: */
|
||||
if (rq->curr == rq->idle && rq->cfs.nr_running)
|
||||
resched_curr(rq);
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue