sched/deadline: Fix priority inheritance with multiple scheduling classes
Glenn reported that "an application [he developed produces] a BUG in deadline.c when a SCHED_DEADLINE task contends with CFS tasks on nested PTHREAD_PRIO_INHERIT mutexes. I believe the bug is triggered when a CFS task that was boosted by a SCHED_DEADLINE task boosts another CFS task (nested priority inheritance). ------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at kernel/sched/deadline.c:1462! invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP CPU: 12 PID: 19171 Comm: dl_boost_bug Tainted: ... Hardware name: ... RIP: 0010:enqueue_task_dl+0x335/0x910 Code: ... RSP: 0018:ffffc9000c2bbc68 EFLAGS: 00010002 RAX: 0000000000000009 RBX: ffff888c0af94c00 RCX: ffffffff81e12500 RDX: 000000000000002e RSI: ffff888c0af94c00 RDI: ffff888c10b22600 RBP: ffffc9000c2bbd08 R08: 0000000000000009 R09: 0000000000000078 R10: ffffffff81e12440 R11: ffffffff81e1236c R12: ffff888bc8932600 R13: ffff888c0af94eb8 R14: ffff888c10b22600 R15: ffff888bc8932600 FS: 00007fa58ac55700(0000) GS:ffff888c10b00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 00007fa58b523230 CR3: 0000000bf44ab003 CR4: 00000000007606e0 DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 PKRU: 55555554 Call Trace: ? intel_pstate_update_util_hwp+0x13/0x170 rt_mutex_setprio+0x1cc/0x4b0 task_blocks_on_rt_mutex+0x225/0x260 rt_spin_lock_slowlock_locked+0xab/0x2d0 rt_spin_lock_slowlock+0x50/0x80 hrtimer_grab_expiry_lock+0x20/0x30 hrtimer_cancel+0x13/0x30 do_nanosleep+0xa0/0x150 hrtimer_nanosleep+0xe1/0x230 ? __hrtimer_init_sleeper+0x60/0x60 __x64_sys_nanosleep+0x8d/0xa0 do_syscall_64+0x4a/0x100 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe RIP: 0033:0x7fa58b52330d ... ---[ end trace 0000000000000002 ]— He also provided a simple reproducer creating the situation below: So the execution order of locking steps are the following (N1 and N2 are non-deadline tasks. D1 is a deadline task. M1 and M2 are mutexes that are enabled * with priority inheritance.) Time moves forward as this timeline goes down: N1 N2 D1 | | | | | | Lock(M1) | | | | | | Lock(M2) | | | | | | Lock(M2) | | | | Lock(M1) | | (!!bug triggered!) | Daniel reported a similar situation as well, by just letting ksoftirqd run with DEADLINE (and eventually block on a mutex). Problem is that boosted entities (Priority Inheritance) use static DEADLINE parameters of the top priority waiter. However, there might be cases where top waiter could be a non-DEADLINE entity that is currently boosted by a DEADLINE entity from a different lock chain (i.e., nested priority chains involving entities of non-DEADLINE classes). In this case, top waiter static DEADLINE parameters could be null (initialized to 0 at fork()) and replenish_dl_entity() would hit a BUG(). Fix this by keeping track of the original donor and using its parameters when a task is boosted. Reported-by:Glenn Elliott <glenn@aurora.tech> Reported-by: