Re: [PATCH RFC] tick/nohz: fix data races in get_cpu_idle_time_us()

[Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>]

On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 12:53:02PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 15:44:00 +0100 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> > 
> > Seriously this procfs accuracy is the least of the problems and if this
> > would be the only issue then we could trivially fix it by declaring that
> > the procfs output might go backwards. It's an estimate after all. If
> > there would be a real reason to ensure monotonicity there then we could
> > easily do that in the readout code.
> > 
> > But the real issue is that both get_cpu_idle_time_us() and
> > get_cpu_iowait_time_us() can invoke update_ts_time_stats() which is way
> > worse than the above procfs idle time going backwards.
> > 
> > If update_ts_time_stats() is invoked concurrently for the same CPU then
> > ts->idle_sleeptime and ts->iowait_sleeptime are turning into random
> > numbers.
> > 
> > This has been broken 12 years ago in commit 595aac488b54 ("sched:
> > Introduce a function to update the idle statistics").
> 
> [...]
> 
> > 
> > P.S.: I hate the spinlock in the idle code path, but I don't have a
> >       better idea.
> 
> Provided the percpu rule is enforced, the random numbers mentioned above
> could be erased without another spinlock added.
> 
> Hillf
> +++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> @@ -640,13 +640,26 @@ static void tick_nohz_update_jiffies(kti
>  /*
>   * Updates the per-CPU time idle statistics counters
>   */
> -static void
> -update_ts_time_stats(int cpu, struct tick_sched *ts, ktime_t now, u64 *last_update_time)
> +static u64 update_ts_time_stats(int cpu, struct tick_sched *ts, ktime_t now,
> +				int io, u64 *last_update_time)
>  {
>  	ktime_t delta;
>  
> +	if (last_update_time)
> +		*last_update_time = ktime_to_us(now);
> +
>  	if (ts->idle_active) {
>  		delta = ktime_sub(now, ts->idle_entrytime);
> +
> +		/* update is only expected on the local CPU */
> +		if (cpu != smp_processor_id()) {

Why not just updating it only on idle exit then?

> +			if (io)

I fear it's not up to the caller to decides if the idle time is IO or not.

> +				delta = ktime_add(ts->iowait_sleeptime, delta);
> +			else
> +				delta = ktime_add(ts->idle_sleeptime, delta);
> +			return ktime_to_us(delta);
> +		}
> +
>  		if (nr_iowait_cpu(cpu) > 0)
>  			ts->iowait_sleeptime = ktime_add(ts->iowait_sleeptime, delta);
>  		else

But you kept the old update above.

So if this is not the local CPU, what do you do?

You'd need to return (without updating iowait_sleeptime):

      ts->idle_sleeptime + ktime_sub(ktime_get(), ts->idle_entrytime)

Right? But then you may race with the local updater, risking to return
the delta added twice. So you need at least a seqcount.

But in the end, nr_iowait_cpu() is broken because that counter can be
decremented remotely and so the whole thing is beyond repair:

CPU 0                       CPU  1                    CPU 2
-----                       -----                     ------
//io_schedule() TASK A
current->in_iowait = 1
rq(0)->nr_iowait++
//switch to idle
                    // READ /proc/stat
                    // See nr_iowait_cpu(0) == 1
                    return ts->iowait_sleeptime + ktime_sub(ktime_get(), ts->idle_entrytime)

                                                      //try_to_wake_up(TASK A)
                                                      rq(0)->nr_iowait--
//idle exit
// See nr_iowait_cpu(0) == 0
ts->idle_sleeptime += ktime_sub(ktime_get(), ts->idle_entrytime)


Thanks.