Re: [PATCH] livepatch: Fix idle cpu's tasks transition

[Petr Mladek]

On Thu 2021-09-09 11:16:01, Vasily Gorbik wrote:
> On an idle system with large amount of cpus it might happen that
> klp_update_patch_state() is not reached in do_idle() for a long periods
> of time. With debug messages enabled log is filled with:
> [  499.442643] livepatch: klp_try_switch_task: swapper/63:0 is running
> 
> without any signs of progress. Ending up with "failed to complete
> transition".
> 
> On s390 LPAR with 128 cpus not a single transition is able to complete
> and livepatch kselftests fail. Tests on idling x86 kvm instance with 128
> cpus demonstrate similar symptoms with and without CONFIG_NO_HZ.
> 
> To deal with that, since runqueue is already locked in
> klp_try_switch_task() identify idling cpus and trigger rescheduling
> potentially waking them up and making sure idle tasks break out of
> do_idle() inner loop and reach klp_update_patch_state(). This helps to
> speed up transition time while avoiding unnecessary extra system load.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vasily Gorbik <gor@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Previous discussion and RFC PATCH:
> lkml.kernel.org/r/patch.git-b76842ceb035.your-ad-here.call-01625661932-ext-1304@work.hours
> 
>  kernel/livepatch/transition.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/livepatch/transition.c b/kernel/livepatch/transition.c
> index 3a4beb9395c4..c5832b2dd081 100644
> --- a/kernel/livepatch/transition.c
> +++ b/kernel/livepatch/transition.c
> @@ -308,6 +308,8 @@ static bool klp_try_switch_task(struct task_struct *task)

Please, update also the comment above klp_try_switch_task(). I would
write something like:

/*
 * Try to safely switch a task to the target patch state.  If it's currently
 * running, or it's sleeping on a to-be-patched or to-be-unpatched function, or
 * if the stack is unreliable, return false.
 *
 * Idle tasks are switched in the main loop when running.
 */

>  	rq = task_rq_lock(task, &flags);
>  
>  	if (task_running(rq, task) && task != current) {

This would deserve a comment, for example:

		/*
		 * Idle task might stay running for a long time. Switch them
		 * in the main loop.
		 */

> +		if (is_idle_task(task))
> +			resched_curr(rq);
>  		snprintf(err_buf, STACK_ERR_BUF_SIZE,
>  			 "%s: %s:%d is running\n", __func__, task->comm,
>  			 task->pid);

Otherwise, it looks good to me. With the two comments:

Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@xxxxxxxx>

Best Regards,
Petr