linux.git/kernel/sched/core_sched.c, branch v5.16.4

Merge tag 'kernel.sys.v5.16' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/brauner/linux

2021-11-11T00:10:47+00:00

Pull prctl updates from Christian Brauner:
 "This contains the missing prctl uapi pieces for PR_SCHED_CORE.

  In order to activate core scheduling the caller is expected to specify
  the scope of the new core scheduling domain.

  For example, passing 2 in the 4th argument of

     prctl(PR_SCHED_CORE, PR_SCHED_CORE_CREATE, ,  2, 0);

  would indicate that the new core scheduling domain encompasses all
  tasks in the process group of . Specifying 0 would only create a
  core scheduling domain for the thread identified by  and 2 would
  encompass the whole thread-group of .

  Note, the values 0, 1, and 2 correspond to PIDTYPE_PID, PIDTYPE_TGID,
  and PIDTYPE_PGID. A first version tried to expose those values
  directly to which I objected because:

   - PIDTYPE_* is an enum that is kernel internal which we should not
     expose to userspace directly.

   - PIDTYPE_* indicates what a given struct pid is used for it doesn't
     express a scope.

  But what the 4th argument of PR_SCHED_CORE prctl() expresses is the
  scope of the operation, i.e. the scope of the core scheduling domain
  at creation time. So Eugene's patch now simply introduces three new
  defines PR_SCHED_CORE_SCOPE_THREAD, PR_SCHED_CORE_SCOPE_THREAD_GROUP,
  and PR_SCHED_CORE_SCOPE_PROCESS_GROUP. They simply express what
  happens.

  This has been on the mailing list for quite a while with all relevant
  scheduler folks Cced. I announced multiple times that I'd pick this up
  if I don't see or her anyone else doing it. None of this touches
  proper scheduler code but only concerns uapi so I think this is fine.

  With core scheduling being quite common now for vm managers (e.g.
  moving individual vcpu threads into their own core scheduling domain)
  and container managers (e.g. moving the init process into its own core
  scheduling domain and letting all created children inherit it) having
  to rely on raw numbers passed as the 4th argument in prctl() is a bit
  annoying and everyone is starting to come up with their own defines"

* tag 'kernel.sys.v5.16' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/brauner/linux:
  uapi/linux/prctl: provide macro definitions for the PR_SCHED_CORE type argument

sched: Make cookie functions static

2021-10-05T13:52:07+00:00

Make cookie functions static as these are no longer invoked directly
by other code.

No functional change intended.

Signed-off-by: Shaokun Zhang 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210922085735.52812-1-zhangshaokun@hisilicon.com

uapi/linux/prctl: provide macro definitions for the PR_SCHED_CORE type argument

2021-09-29T11:00:05+00:00

Commit 7ac592aa35a684ff ("sched: prctl() core-scheduling interface")
made use of enum pid_type in prctl's arg4; this type and the associated
enumeration definitions are not exposed to userspace.  Christian
has suggested to provide additional macro definitions that convey
the meaning of the type argument more in alignment with its actual
usage, and this patch does exactly that.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210825170613.GA3884@asgard.redhat.com
Suggested-by: Christian Brauner 
Acked-by: Christian Brauner 
Signed-off-by: Eugene Syromiatnikov 
Complements: 7ac592aa35a684ff ("sched: prctl() core-scheduling interface")
Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner

sched: prctl() core-scheduling interface

2021-05-12T09:43:31+00:00

This patch provides support for setting and copying core scheduling
'task cookies' between threads (PID), processes (TGID), and process
groups (PGID).

The value of core scheduling isn't that tasks don't share a core,
'nosmt' can do that. The value lies in exploiting all the sharing
opportunities that exist to recover possible lost performance and that
requires a degree of flexibility in the API.

From a security perspective (and there are others), the thread,
process and process group distinction is an existent hierarchal
categorization of tasks that reflects many of the security concerns
about 'data sharing'. For example, protecting against cache-snooping
by a thread that can just read the memory directly isn't all that
useful.

With this in mind, subcommands to CREATE/SHARE (TO/FROM) provide a
mechanism to create and share cookies. CREATE/SHARE_TO specify a
target pid with enum pidtype used to specify the scope of the targeted
tasks. For example, PIDTYPE_TGID will share the cookie with the
process and all of it's threads as typically desired in a security
scenario.

API:

  prctl(PR_SCHED_CORE, PR_SCHED_CORE_GET, tgtpid, pidtype, &cookie)
  prctl(PR_SCHED_CORE, PR_SCHED_CORE_CREATE, tgtpid, pidtype, NULL)
  prctl(PR_SCHED_CORE, PR_SCHED_CORE_SHARE_TO, tgtpid, pidtype, NULL)
  prctl(PR_SCHED_CORE, PR_SCHED_CORE_SHARE_FROM, srcpid, pidtype, NULL)

where 'tgtpid/srcpid == 0' implies the current process and pidtype is
kernel enum pid_type {PIDTYPE_PID, PIDTYPE_TGID, PIDTYPE_PGID, ...}.

For return values, EINVAL, ENOMEM are what they say. ESRCH means the
tgtpid/srcpid was not found. EPERM indicates lack of PTRACE permission
access to tgtpid/srcpid. ENODEV indicates your machines lacks SMT.

[peterz: complete rewrite]
Signed-off-by: Chris Hyser 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Tested-by: Don Hiatt 
Tested-by: Hongyu Ning 
Tested-by: Vincent Guittot 
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210422123309.039845339@infradead.org

sched: Inherit task cookie on fork()

2021-05-12T09:43:31+00:00

Note that sched_core_fork() is called from under tasklist_lock, and
not from sched_fork() earlier. This avoids a few races later.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Tested-by: Don Hiatt 
Tested-by: Hongyu Ning 
Tested-by: Vincent Guittot 
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210422123308.980003687@infradead.org

sched: Trivial core scheduling cookie management

2021-05-12T09:43:31+00:00

In order to not have to use pid_struct, create a new, smaller,
structure to manage task cookies for core scheduling.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Tested-by: Don Hiatt 
Tested-by: Hongyu Ning 
Tested-by: Vincent Guittot 
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210422123308.919768100@infradead.org