milos-linux/kernel/freezer.c

247 lines
5.9 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
/*
* kernel/freezer.c - Function to freeze a process
*
* Originally from kernel/power/process.c
*/
#include <linux/interrupt.h>
#include <linux/suspend.h>
#include <linux/export.h>
#include <linux/syscalls.h>
#include <linux/freezer.h>
mm/oom_kill: thaw the entire OOM victim process Patch series "Improvements to Victim Process Thawing and OOM Reaper Traversal Order", v10. This patch series focuses on optimizing victim process thawing and refining the traversal order of the OOM reaper. Since __thaw_task() is used to thaw a single thread of the victim, thawing only one thread cannot guarantee the exit of the OOM victim when it is frozen. Patch 1 thaw the entire process of the OOM victim to ensure that OOM victims are able to terminate themselves. Even if the oom_reaper is delayed, patch 2 is still beneficial for reaping processes with a large address space footprint, and it also greatly improves process_mrelease. This patch (of 10): OOM killer is a mechanism that selects and kills processes when the system runs out of memory to reclaim resources and keep the system stable. But the oom victim cannot terminate on its own when it is frozen, even if the OOM victim task is thawed through __thaw_task(). This is because __thaw_task() can only thaw a single OOM victim thread, and cannot thaw the entire OOM victim process. In addition, freezing_slow_path() determines whether a task is an OOM victim by checking the task's TIF_MEMDIE flag. When a task is identified as an OOM victim, the freezer bypasses both PM freezing and cgroup freezing states to thaw it. Historically, TIF_MEMDIE was a "this is the oom victim & it has access to memory reserves" flag in the past. It has that thread vs. process problems and tsk_is_oom_victim was introduced later to get rid of them and other issues as well as the guarantee that we can identify the oom victim's mm reliably for other oom_reaper. Therefore, thaw_process() is introduced to unfreeze all threads within the OOM victim process, ensuring that every thread is properly thawed. The freezer now uses tsk_is_oom_victim() to determine OOM victim status, allowing all victim threads to be unfrozen as necessary. With this change, the entire OOM victim process will be thawed when an OOM event occurs, ensuring that the victim can terminate on its own. Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250915162946.5515-1-zhongjinji@honor.com Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250915162946.5515-2-zhongjinji@honor.com Signed-off-by: zhongjinji <zhongjinji@honor.com> Reviewed-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Acked-by: Liam R. Howlett <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com> Cc: Thomas Gleinxer <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2025-09-16 00:29:45 +08:00
#include <linux/oom.h>
#include <linux/kthread.h>
freezer: make freezing() test freeze conditions in effect instead of TIF_FREEZE Using TIF_FREEZE for freezing worked when there was only single freezing condition (the PM one); however, now there is also the cgroup_freezer and single bit flag is getting clumsy. thaw_processes() is already testing whether cgroup freezing in in effect to avoid thawing tasks which were frozen by both PM and cgroup freezers. This is racy (nothing prevents race against cgroup freezing) and fragile. A much simpler way is to test actual freeze conditions from freezing() - ie. directly test whether PM or cgroup freezing is in effect. This patch adds variables to indicate whether and what type of freezing conditions are in effect and reimplements freezing() such that it directly tests whether any of the two freezing conditions is active and the task should freeze. On fast path, freezing() is still very cheap - it only tests system_freezing_cnt. This makes the clumsy dancing aroung TIF_FREEZE unnecessary and freeze/thaw operations more usual - updating state variables for the new state and nudging target tasks so that they notice the new state and comply. As long as the nudging happens after state update, it's race-free. * This allows use of freezing() in freeze_task(). Replace the open coded tests with freezing(). * p != current test is added to warning printing conditions in try_to_freeze_tasks() failure path. This is necessary as freezing() is now true for the task which initiated freezing too. -v2: Oleg pointed out that re-freezing FROZEN cgroup could increment system_freezing_cnt. Fixed. Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Acked-by: Paul Menage <paul@paulmenage.org> (for the cgroup portions)
2011-11-21 12:32:25 -08:00
/* total number of freezing conditions in effect */
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(freezer_active);
EXPORT_SYMBOL(freezer_active);
freezer: make freezing() test freeze conditions in effect instead of TIF_FREEZE Using TIF_FREEZE for freezing worked when there was only single freezing condition (the PM one); however, now there is also the cgroup_freezer and single bit flag is getting clumsy. thaw_processes() is already testing whether cgroup freezing in in effect to avoid thawing tasks which were frozen by both PM and cgroup freezers. This is racy (nothing prevents race against cgroup freezing) and fragile. A much simpler way is to test actual freeze conditions from freezing() - ie. directly test whether PM or cgroup freezing is in effect. This patch adds variables to indicate whether and what type of freezing conditions are in effect and reimplements freezing() such that it directly tests whether any of the two freezing conditions is active and the task should freeze. On fast path, freezing() is still very cheap - it only tests system_freezing_cnt. This makes the clumsy dancing aroung TIF_FREEZE unnecessary and freeze/thaw operations more usual - updating state variables for the new state and nudging target tasks so that they notice the new state and comply. As long as the nudging happens after state update, it's race-free. * This allows use of freezing() in freeze_task(). Replace the open coded tests with freezing(). * p != current test is added to warning printing conditions in try_to_freeze_tasks() failure path. This is necessary as freezing() is now true for the task which initiated freezing too. -v2: Oleg pointed out that re-freezing FROZEN cgroup could increment system_freezing_cnt. Fixed. Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Acked-by: Paul Menage <paul@paulmenage.org> (for the cgroup portions)
2011-11-21 12:32:25 -08:00
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
/*
* indicate whether PM freezing is in effect, protected by
* system_transition_mutex
*/
freezer: make freezing() test freeze conditions in effect instead of TIF_FREEZE Using TIF_FREEZE for freezing worked when there was only single freezing condition (the PM one); however, now there is also the cgroup_freezer and single bit flag is getting clumsy. thaw_processes() is already testing whether cgroup freezing in in effect to avoid thawing tasks which were frozen by both PM and cgroup freezers. This is racy (nothing prevents race against cgroup freezing) and fragile. A much simpler way is to test actual freeze conditions from freezing() - ie. directly test whether PM or cgroup freezing is in effect. This patch adds variables to indicate whether and what type of freezing conditions are in effect and reimplements freezing() such that it directly tests whether any of the two freezing conditions is active and the task should freeze. On fast path, freezing() is still very cheap - it only tests system_freezing_cnt. This makes the clumsy dancing aroung TIF_FREEZE unnecessary and freeze/thaw operations more usual - updating state variables for the new state and nudging target tasks so that they notice the new state and comply. As long as the nudging happens after state update, it's race-free. * This allows use of freezing() in freeze_task(). Replace the open coded tests with freezing(). * p != current test is added to warning printing conditions in try_to_freeze_tasks() failure path. This is necessary as freezing() is now true for the task which initiated freezing too. -v2: Oleg pointed out that re-freezing FROZEN cgroup could increment system_freezing_cnt. Fixed. Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Acked-by: Paul Menage <paul@paulmenage.org> (for the cgroup portions)
2011-11-21 12:32:25 -08:00
bool pm_freezing;
bool pm_nosig_freezing;
/* protects freezing and frozen transitions */
static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(freezer_lock);
freezer: make freezing() test freeze conditions in effect instead of TIF_FREEZE Using TIF_FREEZE for freezing worked when there was only single freezing condition (the PM one); however, now there is also the cgroup_freezer and single bit flag is getting clumsy. thaw_processes() is already testing whether cgroup freezing in in effect to avoid thawing tasks which were frozen by both PM and cgroup freezers. This is racy (nothing prevents race against cgroup freezing) and fragile. A much simpler way is to test actual freeze conditions from freezing() - ie. directly test whether PM or cgroup freezing is in effect. This patch adds variables to indicate whether and what type of freezing conditions are in effect and reimplements freezing() such that it directly tests whether any of the two freezing conditions is active and the task should freeze. On fast path, freezing() is still very cheap - it only tests system_freezing_cnt. This makes the clumsy dancing aroung TIF_FREEZE unnecessary and freeze/thaw operations more usual - updating state variables for the new state and nudging target tasks so that they notice the new state and comply. As long as the nudging happens after state update, it's race-free. * This allows use of freezing() in freeze_task(). Replace the open coded tests with freezing(). * p != current test is added to warning printing conditions in try_to_freeze_tasks() failure path. This is necessary as freezing() is now true for the task which initiated freezing too. -v2: Oleg pointed out that re-freezing FROZEN cgroup could increment system_freezing_cnt. Fixed. Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Acked-by: Paul Menage <paul@paulmenage.org> (for the cgroup portions)
2011-11-21 12:32:25 -08:00
/**
* freezing_slow_path - slow path for testing whether a task needs to be frozen
* @p: task to be tested
*
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
* This function is called by freezing() if freezer_active isn't zero
freezer: make freezing() test freeze conditions in effect instead of TIF_FREEZE Using TIF_FREEZE for freezing worked when there was only single freezing condition (the PM one); however, now there is also the cgroup_freezer and single bit flag is getting clumsy. thaw_processes() is already testing whether cgroup freezing in in effect to avoid thawing tasks which were frozen by both PM and cgroup freezers. This is racy (nothing prevents race against cgroup freezing) and fragile. A much simpler way is to test actual freeze conditions from freezing() - ie. directly test whether PM or cgroup freezing is in effect. This patch adds variables to indicate whether and what type of freezing conditions are in effect and reimplements freezing() such that it directly tests whether any of the two freezing conditions is active and the task should freeze. On fast path, freezing() is still very cheap - it only tests system_freezing_cnt. This makes the clumsy dancing aroung TIF_FREEZE unnecessary and freeze/thaw operations more usual - updating state variables for the new state and nudging target tasks so that they notice the new state and comply. As long as the nudging happens after state update, it's race-free. * This allows use of freezing() in freeze_task(). Replace the open coded tests with freezing(). * p != current test is added to warning printing conditions in try_to_freeze_tasks() failure path. This is necessary as freezing() is now true for the task which initiated freezing too. -v2: Oleg pointed out that re-freezing FROZEN cgroup could increment system_freezing_cnt. Fixed. Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Acked-by: Paul Menage <paul@paulmenage.org> (for the cgroup portions)
2011-11-21 12:32:25 -08:00
* and tests whether @p needs to enter and stay in frozen state. Can be
* called under any context. The freezers are responsible for ensuring the
* target tasks see the updated state.
*/
bool freezing_slow_path(struct task_struct *p)
{
if (p->flags & (PF_NOFREEZE | PF_SUSPEND_TASK))
freezer: make freezing() test freeze conditions in effect instead of TIF_FREEZE Using TIF_FREEZE for freezing worked when there was only single freezing condition (the PM one); however, now there is also the cgroup_freezer and single bit flag is getting clumsy. thaw_processes() is already testing whether cgroup freezing in in effect to avoid thawing tasks which were frozen by both PM and cgroup freezers. This is racy (nothing prevents race against cgroup freezing) and fragile. A much simpler way is to test actual freeze conditions from freezing() - ie. directly test whether PM or cgroup freezing is in effect. This patch adds variables to indicate whether and what type of freezing conditions are in effect and reimplements freezing() such that it directly tests whether any of the two freezing conditions is active and the task should freeze. On fast path, freezing() is still very cheap - it only tests system_freezing_cnt. This makes the clumsy dancing aroung TIF_FREEZE unnecessary and freeze/thaw operations more usual - updating state variables for the new state and nudging target tasks so that they notice the new state and comply. As long as the nudging happens after state update, it's race-free. * This allows use of freezing() in freeze_task(). Replace the open coded tests with freezing(). * p != current test is added to warning printing conditions in try_to_freeze_tasks() failure path. This is necessary as freezing() is now true for the task which initiated freezing too. -v2: Oleg pointed out that re-freezing FROZEN cgroup could increment system_freezing_cnt. Fixed. Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Acked-by: Paul Menage <paul@paulmenage.org> (for the cgroup portions)
2011-11-21 12:32:25 -08:00
return false;
mm/oom_kill: thaw the entire OOM victim process Patch series "Improvements to Victim Process Thawing and OOM Reaper Traversal Order", v10. This patch series focuses on optimizing victim process thawing and refining the traversal order of the OOM reaper. Since __thaw_task() is used to thaw a single thread of the victim, thawing only one thread cannot guarantee the exit of the OOM victim when it is frozen. Patch 1 thaw the entire process of the OOM victim to ensure that OOM victims are able to terminate themselves. Even if the oom_reaper is delayed, patch 2 is still beneficial for reaping processes with a large address space footprint, and it also greatly improves process_mrelease. This patch (of 10): OOM killer is a mechanism that selects and kills processes when the system runs out of memory to reclaim resources and keep the system stable. But the oom victim cannot terminate on its own when it is frozen, even if the OOM victim task is thawed through __thaw_task(). This is because __thaw_task() can only thaw a single OOM victim thread, and cannot thaw the entire OOM victim process. In addition, freezing_slow_path() determines whether a task is an OOM victim by checking the task's TIF_MEMDIE flag. When a task is identified as an OOM victim, the freezer bypasses both PM freezing and cgroup freezing states to thaw it. Historically, TIF_MEMDIE was a "this is the oom victim & it has access to memory reserves" flag in the past. It has that thread vs. process problems and tsk_is_oom_victim was introduced later to get rid of them and other issues as well as the guarantee that we can identify the oom victim's mm reliably for other oom_reaper. Therefore, thaw_process() is introduced to unfreeze all threads within the OOM victim process, ensuring that every thread is properly thawed. The freezer now uses tsk_is_oom_victim() to determine OOM victim status, allowing all victim threads to be unfrozen as necessary. With this change, the entire OOM victim process will be thawed when an OOM event occurs, ensuring that the victim can terminate on its own. Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250915162946.5515-1-zhongjinji@honor.com Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250915162946.5515-2-zhongjinji@honor.com Signed-off-by: zhongjinji <zhongjinji@honor.com> Reviewed-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Acked-by: Liam R. Howlett <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com> Cc: Thomas Gleinxer <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2025-09-16 00:29:45 +08:00
if (tsk_is_oom_victim(p))
return false;
if (pm_nosig_freezing || cgroup1_freezing(p))
freezer: make freezing() test freeze conditions in effect instead of TIF_FREEZE Using TIF_FREEZE for freezing worked when there was only single freezing condition (the PM one); however, now there is also the cgroup_freezer and single bit flag is getting clumsy. thaw_processes() is already testing whether cgroup freezing in in effect to avoid thawing tasks which were frozen by both PM and cgroup freezers. This is racy (nothing prevents race against cgroup freezing) and fragile. A much simpler way is to test actual freeze conditions from freezing() - ie. directly test whether PM or cgroup freezing is in effect. This patch adds variables to indicate whether and what type of freezing conditions are in effect and reimplements freezing() such that it directly tests whether any of the two freezing conditions is active and the task should freeze. On fast path, freezing() is still very cheap - it only tests system_freezing_cnt. This makes the clumsy dancing aroung TIF_FREEZE unnecessary and freeze/thaw operations more usual - updating state variables for the new state and nudging target tasks so that they notice the new state and comply. As long as the nudging happens after state update, it's race-free. * This allows use of freezing() in freeze_task(). Replace the open coded tests with freezing(). * p != current test is added to warning printing conditions in try_to_freeze_tasks() failure path. This is necessary as freezing() is now true for the task which initiated freezing too. -v2: Oleg pointed out that re-freezing FROZEN cgroup could increment system_freezing_cnt. Fixed. Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Acked-by: Paul Menage <paul@paulmenage.org> (for the cgroup portions)
2011-11-21 12:32:25 -08:00
return true;
if (pm_freezing && !(p->flags & PF_KTHREAD))
freezer: make freezing() test freeze conditions in effect instead of TIF_FREEZE Using TIF_FREEZE for freezing worked when there was only single freezing condition (the PM one); however, now there is also the cgroup_freezer and single bit flag is getting clumsy. thaw_processes() is already testing whether cgroup freezing in in effect to avoid thawing tasks which were frozen by both PM and cgroup freezers. This is racy (nothing prevents race against cgroup freezing) and fragile. A much simpler way is to test actual freeze conditions from freezing() - ie. directly test whether PM or cgroup freezing is in effect. This patch adds variables to indicate whether and what type of freezing conditions are in effect and reimplements freezing() such that it directly tests whether any of the two freezing conditions is active and the task should freeze. On fast path, freezing() is still very cheap - it only tests system_freezing_cnt. This makes the clumsy dancing aroung TIF_FREEZE unnecessary and freeze/thaw operations more usual - updating state variables for the new state and nudging target tasks so that they notice the new state and comply. As long as the nudging happens after state update, it's race-free. * This allows use of freezing() in freeze_task(). Replace the open coded tests with freezing(). * p != current test is added to warning printing conditions in try_to_freeze_tasks() failure path. This is necessary as freezing() is now true for the task which initiated freezing too. -v2: Oleg pointed out that re-freezing FROZEN cgroup could increment system_freezing_cnt. Fixed. Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Acked-by: Paul Menage <paul@paulmenage.org> (for the cgroup portions)
2011-11-21 12:32:25 -08:00
return true;
return false;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(freezing_slow_path);
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
bool frozen(struct task_struct *p)
{
return READ_ONCE(p->__state) & TASK_FROZEN;
}
/* Refrigerator is place where frozen processes are stored :-). */
bool __refrigerator(bool check_kthr_stop)
{
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
unsigned int state = get_current_state();
bool was_frozen = false;
pr_debug("%s entered refrigerator\n", current->comm);
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
WARN_ON_ONCE(state && !(state & TASK_NORMAL));
for (;;) {
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
bool freeze;
freezer,sched: Use saved_state to reduce some spurious wakeups After commit f5d39b020809 ("freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic"), tasks that transition directly from TASK_FREEZABLE to TASK_FROZEN are always woken up on the thaw path. Prior to that commit, tasks could ask freezer to consider them "frozen enough" via freezer_do_not_count(). The commit replaced freezer_do_not_count() with a TASK_FREEZABLE state which allows freezer to immediately mark the task as TASK_FROZEN without waking up the task. This is efficient for the suspend path, but on the thaw path, the task is always woken up even if the task didn't need to wake up and goes back to its TASK_(UN)INTERRUPTIBLE state. Although these tasks are capable of handling of the wakeup, we can observe a power/perf impact from the extra wakeup. We observed on Android many tasks wait in the TASK_FREEZABLE state (particularly due to many of them being binder clients). We observed nearly 4x the number of tasks and a corresponding linear increase in latency and power consumption when thawing the system. The latency increased from ~15ms to ~50ms. Avoid the spurious wakeups by saving the state of TASK_FREEZABLE tasks. If the task was running before entering TASK_FROZEN state (__refrigerator()) or if the task received a wake up for the saved state, then the task is woken on thaw. saved_state from PREEMPT_RT locks can be re-used because freezer would not stomp on the rtlock wait flow: TASK_RTLOCK_WAIT isn't considered freezable. Reported-by: Prakash Viswalingam <quic_prakashv@quicinc.com> Signed-off-by: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@quicinc.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2023-09-08 15:49:16 -07:00
raw_spin_lock_irq(&current->pi_lock);
WRITE_ONCE(current->__state, TASK_FROZEN);
freezer,sched: Use saved_state to reduce some spurious wakeups After commit f5d39b020809 ("freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic"), tasks that transition directly from TASK_FREEZABLE to TASK_FROZEN are always woken up on the thaw path. Prior to that commit, tasks could ask freezer to consider them "frozen enough" via freezer_do_not_count(). The commit replaced freezer_do_not_count() with a TASK_FREEZABLE state which allows freezer to immediately mark the task as TASK_FROZEN without waking up the task. This is efficient for the suspend path, but on the thaw path, the task is always woken up even if the task didn't need to wake up and goes back to its TASK_(UN)INTERRUPTIBLE state. Although these tasks are capable of handling of the wakeup, we can observe a power/perf impact from the extra wakeup. We observed on Android many tasks wait in the TASK_FREEZABLE state (particularly due to many of them being binder clients). We observed nearly 4x the number of tasks and a corresponding linear increase in latency and power consumption when thawing the system. The latency increased from ~15ms to ~50ms. Avoid the spurious wakeups by saving the state of TASK_FREEZABLE tasks. If the task was running before entering TASK_FROZEN state (__refrigerator()) or if the task received a wake up for the saved state, then the task is woken on thaw. saved_state from PREEMPT_RT locks can be re-used because freezer would not stomp on the rtlock wait flow: TASK_RTLOCK_WAIT isn't considered freezable. Reported-by: Prakash Viswalingam <quic_prakashv@quicinc.com> Signed-off-by: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@quicinc.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2023-09-08 15:49:16 -07:00
/* unstale saved_state so that __thaw_task() will wake us up */
current->saved_state = TASK_RUNNING;
raw_spin_unlock_irq(&current->pi_lock);
spin_lock_irq(&freezer_lock);
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
freeze = freezing(current) && !(check_kthr_stop && kthread_should_stop());
spin_unlock_irq(&freezer_lock);
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
if (!freeze)
break;
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
was_frozen = true;
schedule();
}
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
__set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
pr_debug("%s left refrigerator\n", current->comm);
return was_frozen;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(__refrigerator);
static void fake_signal_wake_up(struct task_struct *p)
{
unsigned long flags;
if (lock_task_sighand(p, &flags)) {
signal_wake_up(p, 0);
unlock_task_sighand(p, &flags);
}
}
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
static int __set_task_frozen(struct task_struct *p, void *arg)
{
unsigned int state = READ_ONCE(p->__state);
/*
* Allow freezing the sched_delayed tasks; they will not execute until
* ttwu() fixes them up, so it is safe to swap their state now, instead
* of waiting for them to get fully dequeued.
*/
if (task_is_runnable(p))
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
return 0;
if (p != current && task_curr(p))
return 0;
if (!(state & (TASK_FREEZABLE | __TASK_STOPPED | __TASK_TRACED)))
return 0;
/*
* Only TASK_NORMAL can be augmented with TASK_FREEZABLE, since they
* can suffer spurious wakeups.
*/
if (state & TASK_FREEZABLE)
WARN_ON_ONCE(!(state & TASK_NORMAL));
#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP
/*
* It's dangerous to freeze with locks held; there be dragons there.
*/
if (!(state & __TASK_FREEZABLE_UNSAFE))
WARN_ON_ONCE(debug_locks && p->lockdep_depth);
#endif
freezer,sched: Use saved_state to reduce some spurious wakeups After commit f5d39b020809 ("freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic"), tasks that transition directly from TASK_FREEZABLE to TASK_FROZEN are always woken up on the thaw path. Prior to that commit, tasks could ask freezer to consider them "frozen enough" via freezer_do_not_count(). The commit replaced freezer_do_not_count() with a TASK_FREEZABLE state which allows freezer to immediately mark the task as TASK_FROZEN without waking up the task. This is efficient for the suspend path, but on the thaw path, the task is always woken up even if the task didn't need to wake up and goes back to its TASK_(UN)INTERRUPTIBLE state. Although these tasks are capable of handling of the wakeup, we can observe a power/perf impact from the extra wakeup. We observed on Android many tasks wait in the TASK_FREEZABLE state (particularly due to many of them being binder clients). We observed nearly 4x the number of tasks and a corresponding linear increase in latency and power consumption when thawing the system. The latency increased from ~15ms to ~50ms. Avoid the spurious wakeups by saving the state of TASK_FREEZABLE tasks. If the task was running before entering TASK_FROZEN state (__refrigerator()) or if the task received a wake up for the saved state, then the task is woken on thaw. saved_state from PREEMPT_RT locks can be re-used because freezer would not stomp on the rtlock wait flow: TASK_RTLOCK_WAIT isn't considered freezable. Reported-by: Prakash Viswalingam <quic_prakashv@quicinc.com> Signed-off-by: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@quicinc.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2023-09-08 15:49:16 -07:00
p->saved_state = p->__state;
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
WRITE_ONCE(p->__state, TASK_FROZEN);
return TASK_FROZEN;
}
static bool __freeze_task(struct task_struct *p)
{
/* TASK_FREEZABLE|TASK_STOPPED|TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN */
return task_call_func(p, __set_task_frozen, NULL);
}
/**
* freeze_task - send a freeze request to given task
* @p: task to send the request to
*
* If @p is freezing, the freeze request is sent either by sending a fake
* signal (if it's not a kernel thread) or waking it up (if it's a kernel
* thread).
*
* RETURNS:
* %false, if @p is not freezing or already frozen; %true, otherwise
*/
bool freeze_task(struct task_struct *p)
{
unsigned long flags;
spin_lock_irqsave(&freezer_lock, flags);
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
if (!freezing(p) || frozen(p) || __freeze_task(p)) {
freezer: make freezing() test freeze conditions in effect instead of TIF_FREEZE Using TIF_FREEZE for freezing worked when there was only single freezing condition (the PM one); however, now there is also the cgroup_freezer and single bit flag is getting clumsy. thaw_processes() is already testing whether cgroup freezing in in effect to avoid thawing tasks which were frozen by both PM and cgroup freezers. This is racy (nothing prevents race against cgroup freezing) and fragile. A much simpler way is to test actual freeze conditions from freezing() - ie. directly test whether PM or cgroup freezing is in effect. This patch adds variables to indicate whether and what type of freezing conditions are in effect and reimplements freezing() such that it directly tests whether any of the two freezing conditions is active and the task should freeze. On fast path, freezing() is still very cheap - it only tests system_freezing_cnt. This makes the clumsy dancing aroung TIF_FREEZE unnecessary and freeze/thaw operations more usual - updating state variables for the new state and nudging target tasks so that they notice the new state and comply. As long as the nudging happens after state update, it's race-free. * This allows use of freezing() in freeze_task(). Replace the open coded tests with freezing(). * p != current test is added to warning printing conditions in try_to_freeze_tasks() failure path. This is necessary as freezing() is now true for the task which initiated freezing too. -v2: Oleg pointed out that re-freezing FROZEN cgroup could increment system_freezing_cnt. Fixed. Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Acked-by: Paul Menage <paul@paulmenage.org> (for the cgroup portions)
2011-11-21 12:32:25 -08:00
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&freezer_lock, flags);
return false;
}
if (!(p->flags & PF_KTHREAD))
fake_signal_wake_up(p);
else
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
wake_up_state(p, TASK_NORMAL);
freezer: make freezing() test freeze conditions in effect instead of TIF_FREEZE Using TIF_FREEZE for freezing worked when there was only single freezing condition (the PM one); however, now there is also the cgroup_freezer and single bit flag is getting clumsy. thaw_processes() is already testing whether cgroup freezing in in effect to avoid thawing tasks which were frozen by both PM and cgroup freezers. This is racy (nothing prevents race against cgroup freezing) and fragile. A much simpler way is to test actual freeze conditions from freezing() - ie. directly test whether PM or cgroup freezing is in effect. This patch adds variables to indicate whether and what type of freezing conditions are in effect and reimplements freezing() such that it directly tests whether any of the two freezing conditions is active and the task should freeze. On fast path, freezing() is still very cheap - it only tests system_freezing_cnt. This makes the clumsy dancing aroung TIF_FREEZE unnecessary and freeze/thaw operations more usual - updating state variables for the new state and nudging target tasks so that they notice the new state and comply. As long as the nudging happens after state update, it's race-free. * This allows use of freezing() in freeze_task(). Replace the open coded tests with freezing(). * p != current test is added to warning printing conditions in try_to_freeze_tasks() failure path. This is necessary as freezing() is now true for the task which initiated freezing too. -v2: Oleg pointed out that re-freezing FROZEN cgroup could increment system_freezing_cnt. Fixed. Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Acked-by: Paul Menage <paul@paulmenage.org> (for the cgroup portions)
2011-11-21 12:32:25 -08:00
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&freezer_lock, flags);
freezer: make freezing() test freeze conditions in effect instead of TIF_FREEZE Using TIF_FREEZE for freezing worked when there was only single freezing condition (the PM one); however, now there is also the cgroup_freezer and single bit flag is getting clumsy. thaw_processes() is already testing whether cgroup freezing in in effect to avoid thawing tasks which were frozen by both PM and cgroup freezers. This is racy (nothing prevents race against cgroup freezing) and fragile. A much simpler way is to test actual freeze conditions from freezing() - ie. directly test whether PM or cgroup freezing is in effect. This patch adds variables to indicate whether and what type of freezing conditions are in effect and reimplements freezing() such that it directly tests whether any of the two freezing conditions is active and the task should freeze. On fast path, freezing() is still very cheap - it only tests system_freezing_cnt. This makes the clumsy dancing aroung TIF_FREEZE unnecessary and freeze/thaw operations more usual - updating state variables for the new state and nudging target tasks so that they notice the new state and comply. As long as the nudging happens after state update, it's race-free. * This allows use of freezing() in freeze_task(). Replace the open coded tests with freezing(). * p != current test is added to warning printing conditions in try_to_freeze_tasks() failure path. This is necessary as freezing() is now true for the task which initiated freezing too. -v2: Oleg pointed out that re-freezing FROZEN cgroup could increment system_freezing_cnt. Fixed. Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Acked-by: Paul Menage <paul@paulmenage.org> (for the cgroup portions)
2011-11-21 12:32:25 -08:00
return true;
}
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
/*
freezer,sched: Use saved_state to reduce some spurious wakeups After commit f5d39b020809 ("freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic"), tasks that transition directly from TASK_FREEZABLE to TASK_FROZEN are always woken up on the thaw path. Prior to that commit, tasks could ask freezer to consider them "frozen enough" via freezer_do_not_count(). The commit replaced freezer_do_not_count() with a TASK_FREEZABLE state which allows freezer to immediately mark the task as TASK_FROZEN without waking up the task. This is efficient for the suspend path, but on the thaw path, the task is always woken up even if the task didn't need to wake up and goes back to its TASK_(UN)INTERRUPTIBLE state. Although these tasks are capable of handling of the wakeup, we can observe a power/perf impact from the extra wakeup. We observed on Android many tasks wait in the TASK_FREEZABLE state (particularly due to many of them being binder clients). We observed nearly 4x the number of tasks and a corresponding linear increase in latency and power consumption when thawing the system. The latency increased from ~15ms to ~50ms. Avoid the spurious wakeups by saving the state of TASK_FREEZABLE tasks. If the task was running before entering TASK_FROZEN state (__refrigerator()) or if the task received a wake up for the saved state, then the task is woken on thaw. saved_state from PREEMPT_RT locks can be re-used because freezer would not stomp on the rtlock wait flow: TASK_RTLOCK_WAIT isn't considered freezable. Reported-by: Prakash Viswalingam <quic_prakashv@quicinc.com> Signed-off-by: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@quicinc.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2023-09-08 15:49:16 -07:00
* Restore the saved_state before the task entered freezer. For typical task
* in the __refrigerator(), saved_state == TASK_RUNNING so nothing happens
* here. For tasks which were TASK_NORMAL | TASK_FREEZABLE, their initial state
* is restored unless they got an expected wakeup (see ttwu_state_match()).
* Returns 1 if the task state was restored.
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
*/
freezer,sched: Use saved_state to reduce some spurious wakeups After commit f5d39b020809 ("freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic"), tasks that transition directly from TASK_FREEZABLE to TASK_FROZEN are always woken up on the thaw path. Prior to that commit, tasks could ask freezer to consider them "frozen enough" via freezer_do_not_count(). The commit replaced freezer_do_not_count() with a TASK_FREEZABLE state which allows freezer to immediately mark the task as TASK_FROZEN without waking up the task. This is efficient for the suspend path, but on the thaw path, the task is always woken up even if the task didn't need to wake up and goes back to its TASK_(UN)INTERRUPTIBLE state. Although these tasks are capable of handling of the wakeup, we can observe a power/perf impact from the extra wakeup. We observed on Android many tasks wait in the TASK_FREEZABLE state (particularly due to many of them being binder clients). We observed nearly 4x the number of tasks and a corresponding linear increase in latency and power consumption when thawing the system. The latency increased from ~15ms to ~50ms. Avoid the spurious wakeups by saving the state of TASK_FREEZABLE tasks. If the task was running before entering TASK_FROZEN state (__refrigerator()) or if the task received a wake up for the saved state, then the task is woken on thaw. saved_state from PREEMPT_RT locks can be re-used because freezer would not stomp on the rtlock wait flow: TASK_RTLOCK_WAIT isn't considered freezable. Reported-by: Prakash Viswalingam <quic_prakashv@quicinc.com> Signed-off-by: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@quicinc.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2023-09-08 15:49:16 -07:00
static int __restore_freezer_state(struct task_struct *p, void *arg)
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
{
freezer,sched: Use saved_state to reduce some spurious wakeups After commit f5d39b020809 ("freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic"), tasks that transition directly from TASK_FREEZABLE to TASK_FROZEN are always woken up on the thaw path. Prior to that commit, tasks could ask freezer to consider them "frozen enough" via freezer_do_not_count(). The commit replaced freezer_do_not_count() with a TASK_FREEZABLE state which allows freezer to immediately mark the task as TASK_FROZEN without waking up the task. This is efficient for the suspend path, but on the thaw path, the task is always woken up even if the task didn't need to wake up and goes back to its TASK_(UN)INTERRUPTIBLE state. Although these tasks are capable of handling of the wakeup, we can observe a power/perf impact from the extra wakeup. We observed on Android many tasks wait in the TASK_FREEZABLE state (particularly due to many of them being binder clients). We observed nearly 4x the number of tasks and a corresponding linear increase in latency and power consumption when thawing the system. The latency increased from ~15ms to ~50ms. Avoid the spurious wakeups by saving the state of TASK_FREEZABLE tasks. If the task was running before entering TASK_FROZEN state (__refrigerator()) or if the task received a wake up for the saved state, then the task is woken on thaw. saved_state from PREEMPT_RT locks can be re-used because freezer would not stomp on the rtlock wait flow: TASK_RTLOCK_WAIT isn't considered freezable. Reported-by: Prakash Viswalingam <quic_prakashv@quicinc.com> Signed-off-by: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@quicinc.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2023-09-08 15:49:16 -07:00
unsigned int state = p->saved_state;
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
freezer,sched: Use saved_state to reduce some spurious wakeups After commit f5d39b020809 ("freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic"), tasks that transition directly from TASK_FREEZABLE to TASK_FROZEN are always woken up on the thaw path. Prior to that commit, tasks could ask freezer to consider them "frozen enough" via freezer_do_not_count(). The commit replaced freezer_do_not_count() with a TASK_FREEZABLE state which allows freezer to immediately mark the task as TASK_FROZEN without waking up the task. This is efficient for the suspend path, but on the thaw path, the task is always woken up even if the task didn't need to wake up and goes back to its TASK_(UN)INTERRUPTIBLE state. Although these tasks are capable of handling of the wakeup, we can observe a power/perf impact from the extra wakeup. We observed on Android many tasks wait in the TASK_FREEZABLE state (particularly due to many of them being binder clients). We observed nearly 4x the number of tasks and a corresponding linear increase in latency and power consumption when thawing the system. The latency increased from ~15ms to ~50ms. Avoid the spurious wakeups by saving the state of TASK_FREEZABLE tasks. If the task was running before entering TASK_FROZEN state (__refrigerator()) or if the task received a wake up for the saved state, then the task is woken on thaw. saved_state from PREEMPT_RT locks can be re-used because freezer would not stomp on the rtlock wait flow: TASK_RTLOCK_WAIT isn't considered freezable. Reported-by: Prakash Viswalingam <quic_prakashv@quicinc.com> Signed-off-by: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@quicinc.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2023-09-08 15:49:16 -07:00
if (state != TASK_RUNNING) {
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
WRITE_ONCE(p->__state, state);
p->saved_state = TASK_RUNNING;
freezer,sched: Use saved_state to reduce some spurious wakeups After commit f5d39b020809 ("freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic"), tasks that transition directly from TASK_FREEZABLE to TASK_FROZEN are always woken up on the thaw path. Prior to that commit, tasks could ask freezer to consider them "frozen enough" via freezer_do_not_count(). The commit replaced freezer_do_not_count() with a TASK_FREEZABLE state which allows freezer to immediately mark the task as TASK_FROZEN without waking up the task. This is efficient for the suspend path, but on the thaw path, the task is always woken up even if the task didn't need to wake up and goes back to its TASK_(UN)INTERRUPTIBLE state. Although these tasks are capable of handling of the wakeup, we can observe a power/perf impact from the extra wakeup. We observed on Android many tasks wait in the TASK_FREEZABLE state (particularly due to many of them being binder clients). We observed nearly 4x the number of tasks and a corresponding linear increase in latency and power consumption when thawing the system. The latency increased from ~15ms to ~50ms. Avoid the spurious wakeups by saving the state of TASK_FREEZABLE tasks. If the task was running before entering TASK_FROZEN state (__refrigerator()) or if the task received a wake up for the saved state, then the task is woken on thaw. saved_state from PREEMPT_RT locks can be re-used because freezer would not stomp on the rtlock wait flow: TASK_RTLOCK_WAIT isn't considered freezable. Reported-by: Prakash Viswalingam <quic_prakashv@quicinc.com> Signed-off-by: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@quicinc.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2023-09-08 15:49:16 -07:00
return 1;
}
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
freezer,sched: Use saved_state to reduce some spurious wakeups After commit f5d39b020809 ("freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic"), tasks that transition directly from TASK_FREEZABLE to TASK_FROZEN are always woken up on the thaw path. Prior to that commit, tasks could ask freezer to consider them "frozen enough" via freezer_do_not_count(). The commit replaced freezer_do_not_count() with a TASK_FREEZABLE state which allows freezer to immediately mark the task as TASK_FROZEN without waking up the task. This is efficient for the suspend path, but on the thaw path, the task is always woken up even if the task didn't need to wake up and goes back to its TASK_(UN)INTERRUPTIBLE state. Although these tasks are capable of handling of the wakeup, we can observe a power/perf impact from the extra wakeup. We observed on Android many tasks wait in the TASK_FREEZABLE state (particularly due to many of them being binder clients). We observed nearly 4x the number of tasks and a corresponding linear increase in latency and power consumption when thawing the system. The latency increased from ~15ms to ~50ms. Avoid the spurious wakeups by saving the state of TASK_FREEZABLE tasks. If the task was running before entering TASK_FROZEN state (__refrigerator()) or if the task received a wake up for the saved state, then the task is woken on thaw. saved_state from PREEMPT_RT locks can be re-used because freezer would not stomp on the rtlock wait flow: TASK_RTLOCK_WAIT isn't considered freezable. Reported-by: Prakash Viswalingam <quic_prakashv@quicinc.com> Signed-off-by: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@quicinc.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2023-09-08 15:49:16 -07:00
return 0;
freezer,sched: Rewrite core freezer logic Rewrite the core freezer to behave better wrt thawing and be simpler in general. By replacing PF_FROZEN with TASK_FROZEN, a special block state, it is ensured frozen tasks stay frozen until thawed and don't randomly wake up early, as is currently possible. As such, it does away with PF_FROZEN and PF_FREEZER_SKIP, freeing up two PF_flags (yay!). Specifically; the current scheme works a little like: freezer_do_not_count(); schedule(); freezer_count(); And either the task is blocked, or it lands in try_to_freezer() through freezer_count(). Now, when it is blocked, the freezer considers it frozen and continues. However, on thawing, once pm_freezing is cleared, freezer_count() stops working, and any random/spurious wakeup will let a task run before its time. That is, thawing tries to thaw things in explicit order; kernel threads and workqueues before doing bringing SMP back before userspace etc.. However due to the above mentioned races it is entirely possible for userspace tasks to thaw (by accident) before SMP is back. This can be a fatal problem in asymmetric ISA architectures (eg ARMv9) where the userspace task requires a special CPU to run. As said; replace this with a special task state TASK_FROZEN and add the following state transitions: TASK_FREEZABLE -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_STOPPED -> TASK_FROZEN __TASK_TRACED -> TASK_FROZEN The new TASK_FREEZABLE can be set on any state part of TASK_NORMAL (IOW. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE) -- any such state is already required to deal with spurious wakeups and the freezer causes one such when thawing the task (since the original state is lost). The special __TASK_{STOPPED,TRACED} states *can* be restored since their canonical state is in ->jobctl. With this, frozen tasks need an explicit TASK_FROZEN wakeup and are free of undue (early / spurious) wakeups. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220822114649.055452969@infradead.org
2022-08-22 13:18:22 +02:00
}
void __thaw_task(struct task_struct *p)
container freezer: implement freezer cgroup subsystem This patch implements a new freezer subsystem in the control groups framework. It provides a way to stop and resume execution of all tasks in a cgroup by writing in the cgroup filesystem. The freezer subsystem in the container filesystem defines a file named freezer.state. Writing "FROZEN" to the state file will freeze all tasks in the cgroup. Subsequently writing "RUNNING" will unfreeze the tasks in the cgroup. Reading will return the current state. * Examples of usage : # mkdir /containers/freezer # mount -t cgroup -ofreezer freezer /containers # mkdir /containers/0 # echo $some_pid > /containers/0/tasks to get status of the freezer subsystem : # cat /containers/0/freezer.state RUNNING to freeze all tasks in the container : # echo FROZEN > /containers/0/freezer.state # cat /containers/0/freezer.state FREEZING # cat /containers/0/freezer.state FROZEN to unfreeze all tasks in the container : # echo RUNNING > /containers/0/freezer.state # cat /containers/0/freezer.state RUNNING This is the basic mechanism which should do the right thing for user space task in a simple scenario. It's important to note that freezing can be incomplete. In that case we return EBUSY. This means that some tasks in the cgroup are busy doing something that prevents us from completely freezing the cgroup at this time. After EBUSY, the cgroup will remain partially frozen -- reflected by freezer.state reporting "FREEZING" when read. The state will remain "FREEZING" until one of these things happens: 1) Userspace cancels the freezing operation by writing "RUNNING" to the freezer.state file 2) Userspace retries the freezing operation by writing "FROZEN" to the freezer.state file (writing "FREEZING" is not legal and returns EIO) 3) The tasks that blocked the cgroup from entering the "FROZEN" state disappear from the cgroup's set of tasks. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes] [akpm@linux-foundation.org: export thaw_process] Signed-off-by: Cedric Le Goater <clg@fr.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Matt Helsley <matthltc@us.ibm.com> Acked-by: Serge E. Hallyn <serue@us.ibm.com> Tested-by: Matt Helsley <matthltc@us.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-10-18 20:27:21 -07:00
{
2025-07-17 08:55:49 +00:00
guard(spinlock_irqsave)(&freezer_lock);
if (frozen(p) && !task_call_func(p, __restore_freezer_state, NULL))
wake_up_state(p, TASK_FROZEN);
container freezer: implement freezer cgroup subsystem This patch implements a new freezer subsystem in the control groups framework. It provides a way to stop and resume execution of all tasks in a cgroup by writing in the cgroup filesystem. The freezer subsystem in the container filesystem defines a file named freezer.state. Writing "FROZEN" to the state file will freeze all tasks in the cgroup. Subsequently writing "RUNNING" will unfreeze the tasks in the cgroup. Reading will return the current state. * Examples of usage : # mkdir /containers/freezer # mount -t cgroup -ofreezer freezer /containers # mkdir /containers/0 # echo $some_pid > /containers/0/tasks to get status of the freezer subsystem : # cat /containers/0/freezer.state RUNNING to freeze all tasks in the container : # echo FROZEN > /containers/0/freezer.state # cat /containers/0/freezer.state FREEZING # cat /containers/0/freezer.state FROZEN to unfreeze all tasks in the container : # echo RUNNING > /containers/0/freezer.state # cat /containers/0/freezer.state RUNNING This is the basic mechanism which should do the right thing for user space task in a simple scenario. It's important to note that freezing can be incomplete. In that case we return EBUSY. This means that some tasks in the cgroup are busy doing something that prevents us from completely freezing the cgroup at this time. After EBUSY, the cgroup will remain partially frozen -- reflected by freezer.state reporting "FREEZING" when read. The state will remain "FREEZING" until one of these things happens: 1) Userspace cancels the freezing operation by writing "RUNNING" to the freezer.state file 2) Userspace retries the freezing operation by writing "FROZEN" to the freezer.state file (writing "FREEZING" is not legal and returns EIO) 3) The tasks that blocked the cgroup from entering the "FROZEN" state disappear from the cgroup's set of tasks. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes] [akpm@linux-foundation.org: export thaw_process] Signed-off-by: Cedric Le Goater <clg@fr.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Matt Helsley <matthltc@us.ibm.com> Acked-by: Serge E. Hallyn <serue@us.ibm.com> Tested-by: Matt Helsley <matthltc@us.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-10-18 20:27:21 -07:00
}
mm/oom_kill: thaw the entire OOM victim process Patch series "Improvements to Victim Process Thawing and OOM Reaper Traversal Order", v10. This patch series focuses on optimizing victim process thawing and refining the traversal order of the OOM reaper. Since __thaw_task() is used to thaw a single thread of the victim, thawing only one thread cannot guarantee the exit of the OOM victim when it is frozen. Patch 1 thaw the entire process of the OOM victim to ensure that OOM victims are able to terminate themselves. Even if the oom_reaper is delayed, patch 2 is still beneficial for reaping processes with a large address space footprint, and it also greatly improves process_mrelease. This patch (of 10): OOM killer is a mechanism that selects and kills processes when the system runs out of memory to reclaim resources and keep the system stable. But the oom victim cannot terminate on its own when it is frozen, even if the OOM victim task is thawed through __thaw_task(). This is because __thaw_task() can only thaw a single OOM victim thread, and cannot thaw the entire OOM victim process. In addition, freezing_slow_path() determines whether a task is an OOM victim by checking the task's TIF_MEMDIE flag. When a task is identified as an OOM victim, the freezer bypasses both PM freezing and cgroup freezing states to thaw it. Historically, TIF_MEMDIE was a "this is the oom victim & it has access to memory reserves" flag in the past. It has that thread vs. process problems and tsk_is_oom_victim was introduced later to get rid of them and other issues as well as the guarantee that we can identify the oom victim's mm reliably for other oom_reaper. Therefore, thaw_process() is introduced to unfreeze all threads within the OOM victim process, ensuring that every thread is properly thawed. The freezer now uses tsk_is_oom_victim() to determine OOM victim status, allowing all victim threads to be unfrozen as necessary. With this change, the entire OOM victim process will be thawed when an OOM event occurs, ensuring that the victim can terminate on its own. Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250915162946.5515-1-zhongjinji@honor.com Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250915162946.5515-2-zhongjinji@honor.com Signed-off-by: zhongjinji <zhongjinji@honor.com> Reviewed-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Acked-by: Liam R. Howlett <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com> Cc: Thomas Gleinxer <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2025-09-16 00:29:45 +08:00
/*
* thaw_process - Thaw a frozen process
* @p: the process to be thawed
*
* Iterate over all threads of @p and call __thaw_task() on each.
*/
void thaw_process(struct task_struct *p)
{
struct task_struct *t;
rcu_read_lock();
for_each_thread(p, t) {
__thaw_task(t);
}
rcu_read_unlock();
}
/**
* set_freezable - make %current freezable
*
* Mark %current freezable and enter refrigerator if necessary.
*/
bool set_freezable(void)
{
might_sleep();
/*
* Modify flags while holding freezer_lock. This ensures the
* freezer notices that we aren't frozen yet or the freezing
* condition is visible to try_to_freeze() below.
*/
spin_lock_irq(&freezer_lock);
current->flags &= ~PF_NOFREEZE;
spin_unlock_irq(&freezer_lock);
return try_to_freeze();
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(set_freezable);