-
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior authored
The kernel test robot triggered a warning with the following race: task-ctx A interrupt-ctx B worker -> process_one_work() -> work_item() -> schedule(); -> sched_submit_work() -> wq_worker_sleeping() -> ->sleeping = 1 atomic_dec_and_test(nr_running) __schedule(); *interrupt* async_page_fault() -> local_irq_enable(); -> schedule(); -> sched_submit_work() -> wq_worker_sleeping() -> if (WARN_ON(->sleeping)) return -> __schedule() -> sched_update_worker() -> wq_worker_running() -> atomic_inc(nr_running); -> ->sleeping = 0; -> sched_update_worker() -> wq_worker_running() if (!->sleeping) return In this context the warning is pointless everything is fine. An interrupt before wq_worker_sleeping() will perform the ->sleeping assignment (0 -> 1 > 0) twice. An interrupt after wq_worker_sleeping() will trigger the warning and nr_running will be decremented (by A) and incremented once (only by B, A will skip it). This is the case until the ->sleeping is zeroed again in wq_worker_running(). Remove the WARN statement because this condition may happen. Document that preemption around wq_worker_sleeping() needs to be disabled to protect ->sleeping and not just as an optimisation. Fixes: 6d25be57 ("sched/core, workqueues: Distangle worker accounting from rq lock") Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200327074308.GY11705@shao2-debian
62849a96