Hello,
This is v3. Changes from v2
(http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]):
- Per-node max_active is now pre-computed and stored in
wq_node_nr_active->max. It also calculates max_active based on the
intersection of online CPUs and the workqueue's effective CPUs to
distribute CPUs fairly on workqueues with a cpumask which is not balanced
across nodes. (Lai)
- wq_dump.py is updated to print out per-node nr/max_active counters.
- wq->node_nr_active is now a flex array. (Lai)
v1(http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]) -> v2:
- wq->max_active now uses WRITE/READ_ONCE() as suggested by Lai.
- __queue_work() is updated to alwyas delay the work item if there already
are inactive work items on the pwq. This prevents work item reordering
inside the pwq when max_active is increased thus maintaining execution
order for ordered workqueues. This issue was noticed by Lai.
- In 0008-workqueue-Introduce-struct-wq_node_nr_active.patch, Lai pointed
out that pwq_tryinc_nr_active() incorrectly dropped pwq->max_active check.
Restored. As the next patch replaces the max_active enforcement mechanism,
this doesn't change the end result.
- 0010-workqueue-Reimplement-ordered-workqueue-using-shared.patch was broken
and could reorder work items in ordered workqueues leading to severe perf
regressions and hangs with certain workloads. Dropped.
A pool_workqueue (pwq) represents the connection between a workqueue and a
worker_pool. One of the roles that a pwq plays is enforcement of the
max_active concurrency limit. Before 636b927eba5b ("workqueue: Make unbound
workqueues to use per-cpu pool_workqueues"), there was one pwq per each CPU
for per-cpu workqueues and per each NUMA node for unbound workqueues, which
was a natural result of per-cpu workqueues being served by per-cpu pools and
unbound by per-NUMA pools.
In terms of max_active enforcement, this was, while not perfect, workable.
For per-cpu workqueues, it was fine. For unbound, it wasn't great in that
NUMA machines would get max_active that's multiplied by the number of nodes
but didn't cause huge problems because NUMA machines are relatively rare and
the node count is usually pretty low.
However, cache layouts are more complex now and sharing a worker pool across
a whole node didn't really work well for unbound workqueues. Thus, a series
of commits culminating on 8639ecebc9b1 ("workqueue: Make unbound workqueues
to use per-cpu pool_workqueues") implemented more flexible affinity
mechanism for unbound workqueues which enables using e.g. last-level-cache
aligned pools. In the process, 636b927eba5b ("workqueue: Make unbound
workqueues to use per-cpu pool_workqueues") made unbound workqueues use
per-cpu pwqs like per-cpu workqueues.
While the change was necessary to enable more flexible affinity scopes, this
came with the side effect of blowing up the effective max_active for unbound
workqueues. Before, the effective max_active for unbound workqueues was
multiplied by the number of nodes. After, by the number of CPUs.
636b927eba5b ("workqueue: Make unbound workqueues to use per-cpu
pool_workqueues") claims that this should generally be okay. It is okay for
users which self-regulates concurrency level which are the vast majority;
however, there are enough use cases which actually depend on max_active to
prevent the level of concurrency from going bonkers including several IO
handling workqueues that can issue a work item for each in-flight IO. With
targeted benchmarks, the misbehavior can easily be exposed as reported in
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/dbu6wiwu3sdhmhikb2w6lns7b27gbobfavhjj57kwi2quafgwl@htjcc5oikcr3.
Unfortunately, there is no way to express what these use cases need using
per-cpu max_active. A CPU may issue most of in-flight IOs, so we don't want
to set max_active too low but as soon as we increase max_active a bit, we
can end up with unreasonable number of in-flight work items when many CPUs
issue IOs at the same time. ie. The acceptable lowest max_active is higher
than the acceptable highest max_active.
Ideally, max_active for an unbound workqueue should be system-wide so that
the users can regulate the total level of concurrency regardless of node and
cache layout. The reasons workqueue hasn't implemented that yet are:
- One max_active enforcement decouples from pool boundaires, chaining
execution after a work item finishes requires inter-pool operations which
would require lock dancing, which is nasty.
- Sharing a single nr_active count across the whole system can be pretty
expensive on NUMA machines.
- Per-pwq enforcement had been more or less okay while we were using
per-node pools.
It looks like we no longer can avoid decoupling max_active enforcement from
pool boundaries. This patchset implements system-wide nr_active mechanism
with the following design characteristics:
- To avoid sharing a single counter across multiple nodes, the configured
max_active is split across nodes according to the proportion of online
CPUs per node. e.g. A node with twice more online CPUs will get twice
higher portion of max_active.
- Workqueue used to be able to process a chain of interdependent work items
which is as long as max_active. We can't do this anymore as max_active is
distributed across the nodes. Instead, a new parameter min_active is
introduced which determines the minimum level of concurrency within a node
regardless of how max_active distribution comes out to be.
It is set to the smaller of max_active and WQ_DFL_MIN_ACTIVE which is 8.
This can lead to higher effective max_weight than configured and also
deadlocks if a workqueue was depending on being able to handle chains of
interdependent work items that are longer than 8.
I believe these should be fine given that the number of CPUs in each NUMA
node is usually higher than 8 and work item chain longer than 8 is pretty
unlikely. However, if these assumptions turn out to be wrong, we'll need
to add an interface to adjust min_active.
- Each unbound wq has an array of struct wq_node_nr_active which tracks
per-node nr_active. When its pwq wants to run a work item, it has to
obtain the matching node's nr_active. If over the node's max_active, the
pwq is queued on wq_node_nr_active->pending_pwqs. As work items finish,
the completion path round-robins the pending pwqs activating the first
inactive work item of each, which involves some pool lock dancing and
kicking other pools. It's not the simplest code but doesn't look too bad.
This patchset includes the following patches:
0001-workqueue-Move-pwq-max_active-to-wq-max_active.patch
0002-workqueue-Factor-out-pwq_is_empty.patch
0003-workqueue-Replace-pwq_activate_inactive_work-with-__.patch
0004-workqueue-Move-nr_active-handling-into-helpers.patch
0005-workqueue-Make-wq_adjust_max_active-round-robin-pwqs.patch
0006-workqueue-RCU-protect-wq-dfl_pwq-and-implement-acces.patch
0007-workqueue-Move-pwq_dec_nr_in_flight-to-the-end-of-wo.patch
0008-workqueue-Introduce-struct-wq_node_nr_active.patch
0009-workqueue-Implement-system-wide-nr_active-enforcemen.patch
0010-tools-workqueue-wq_dump.py-Add-node_nr-max_active-du.patch
This pachset is also available in the following git branch.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/wq.git unbound-system-wide-max_active-v3
diffstat follows. Thanks.
include/linux/workqueue.h | 35 +++
kernel/workqueue.c | 749 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
tools/workqueue/wq_dump.py | 41 +++
3 files changed, 691 insertions(+), 134 deletions(-)
--
tejun
max_active is a workqueue-wide setting and the configured value is stored in
wq->saved_max_active; however, the effective value was stored in
pwq->max_active. While this is harmless, it makes max_active update process
more complicated and gets in the way of the planned max_active semantic
updates for unbound workqueues.
This patches moves pwq->max_active to wq->max_active. This simplifies the
code and makes freezing and noop max_active updates cheaper too. No
user-visible behavior change is intended.
As wq->max_active is updated while holding wq mutex but read without any
locking, it now uses WRITE/READ_ONCE(). A new locking locking rule WO is
added for it.
v2: wq->max_active now uses WRITE/READ_ONCE() as suggested by Lai.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <[email protected]>
---
kernel/workqueue.c | 133 ++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
1 file changed, 66 insertions(+), 67 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 8ca65665efe9..67d9ac1f0990 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -143,6 +143,9 @@ enum {
*
* WR: wq->mutex protected for writes. RCU protected for reads.
*
+ * WO: wq->mutex protected for writes. Updated with WRITE_ONCE() and can be read
+ * with READ_ONCE() without locking.
+ *
* MD: wq_mayday_lock protected.
*
* WD: Used internally by the watchdog.
@@ -250,7 +253,6 @@ struct pool_workqueue {
* is marked with WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE iff it is in pwq->inactive_works.
*/
int nr_active; /* L: nr of active works */
- int max_active; /* L: max active works */
struct list_head inactive_works; /* L: inactive works */
struct list_head pwqs_node; /* WR: node on wq->pwqs */
struct list_head mayday_node; /* MD: node on wq->maydays */
@@ -298,7 +300,8 @@ struct workqueue_struct {
struct worker *rescuer; /* MD: rescue worker */
int nr_drainers; /* WQ: drain in progress */
- int saved_max_active; /* WQ: saved pwq max_active */
+ int max_active; /* WO: max active works */
+ int saved_max_active; /* WQ: saved max_active */
struct workqueue_attrs *unbound_attrs; /* PW: only for unbound wqs */
struct pool_workqueue *dfl_pwq; /* PW: only for unbound wqs */
@@ -1492,7 +1495,7 @@ static void pwq_dec_nr_in_flight(struct pool_workqueue *pwq, unsigned long work_
pwq->nr_active--;
if (!list_empty(&pwq->inactive_works)) {
/* one down, submit an inactive one */
- if (pwq->nr_active < pwq->max_active)
+ if (pwq->nr_active < READ_ONCE(pwq->wq->max_active))
pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq);
}
}
@@ -1793,7 +1796,13 @@ static void __queue_work(int cpu, struct workqueue_struct *wq,
pwq->nr_in_flight[pwq->work_color]++;
work_flags = work_color_to_flags(pwq->work_color);
- if (likely(pwq->nr_active < pwq->max_active)) {
+ /*
+ * Limit the number of concurrently active work items to max_active.
+ * @work must also queue behind existing inactive work items to maintain
+ * ordering when max_active changes. See wq_adjust_max_active().
+ */
+ if (list_empty(&pwq->inactive_works) &&
+ pwq->nr_active < READ_ONCE(pwq->wq->max_active)) {
if (list_empty(&pool->worklist))
pool->watchdog_ts = jiffies;
@@ -4143,50 +4152,6 @@ static void pwq_release_workfn(struct kthread_work *work)
}
}
-/**
- * pwq_adjust_max_active - update a pwq's max_active to the current setting
- * @pwq: target pool_workqueue
- *
- * If @pwq isn't freezing, set @pwq->max_active to the associated
- * workqueue's saved_max_active and activate inactive work items
- * accordingly. If @pwq is freezing, clear @pwq->max_active to zero.
- */
-static void pwq_adjust_max_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
-{
- struct workqueue_struct *wq = pwq->wq;
- bool freezable = wq->flags & WQ_FREEZABLE;
- unsigned long flags;
-
- /* for @wq->saved_max_active */
- lockdep_assert_held(&wq->mutex);
-
- /* fast exit for non-freezable wqs */
- if (!freezable && pwq->max_active == wq->saved_max_active)
- return;
-
- /* this function can be called during early boot w/ irq disabled */
- raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pwq->pool->lock, flags);
-
- /*
- * During [un]freezing, the caller is responsible for ensuring that
- * this function is called at least once after @workqueue_freezing
- * is updated and visible.
- */
- if (!freezable || !workqueue_freezing) {
- pwq->max_active = wq->saved_max_active;
-
- while (!list_empty(&pwq->inactive_works) &&
- pwq->nr_active < pwq->max_active)
- pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq);
-
- kick_pool(pwq->pool);
- } else {
- pwq->max_active = 0;
- }
-
- raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pwq->pool->lock, flags);
-}
-
/* initialize newly allocated @pwq which is associated with @wq and @pool */
static void init_pwq(struct pool_workqueue *pwq, struct workqueue_struct *wq,
struct worker_pool *pool)
@@ -4219,9 +4184,6 @@ static void link_pwq(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
/* set the matching work_color */
pwq->work_color = wq->work_color;
- /* sync max_active to the current setting */
- pwq_adjust_max_active(pwq);
-
/* link in @pwq */
list_add_rcu(&pwq->pwqs_node, &wq->pwqs);
}
@@ -4662,6 +4624,52 @@ static int init_rescuer(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
return 0;
}
+/**
+ * wq_adjust_max_active - update a wq's max_active to the current setting
+ * @wq: target workqueue
+ *
+ * If @wq isn't freezing, set @wq->max_active to the saved_max_active and
+ * activate inactive work items accordingly. If @wq is freezing, clear
+ * @wq->max_active to zero.
+ */
+static void wq_adjust_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
+{
+ struct pool_workqueue *pwq;
+
+ lockdep_assert_held(&wq->mutex);
+
+ if ((wq->flags & WQ_FREEZABLE) && workqueue_freezing) {
+ WRITE_ONCE(wq->max_active, 0);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ if (wq->max_active == wq->saved_max_active)
+ return;
+
+ /*
+ * Update @wq->max_active and then kick inactive work items if more
+ * active work items are allowed. This doesn't break work item ordering
+ * because new work items are always queued behind existing inactive
+ * work items if there are any.
+ */
+ WRITE_ONCE(wq->max_active, wq->saved_max_active);
+
+ for_each_pwq(pwq, wq) {
+ unsigned long flags;
+
+ /* this function can be called during early boot w/ irq disabled */
+ raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pwq->pool->lock, flags);
+
+ while (!list_empty(&pwq->inactive_works) &&
+ pwq->nr_active < wq->max_active)
+ pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq);
+
+ kick_pool(pwq->pool);
+
+ raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pwq->pool->lock, flags);
+ }
+}
+
__printf(1, 4)
struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
unsigned int flags,
@@ -4669,7 +4677,6 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
{
va_list args;
struct workqueue_struct *wq;
- struct pool_workqueue *pwq;
int len;
/*
@@ -4708,6 +4715,7 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
/* init wq */
wq->flags = flags;
+ wq->max_active = max_active;
wq->saved_max_active = max_active;
mutex_init(&wq->mutex);
atomic_set(&wq->nr_pwqs_to_flush, 0);
@@ -4736,8 +4744,7 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
mutex_lock(&wq_pool_mutex);
mutex_lock(&wq->mutex);
- for_each_pwq(pwq, wq)
- pwq_adjust_max_active(pwq);
+ wq_adjust_max_active(wq);
mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex);
list_add_tail_rcu(&wq->list, &workqueues);
@@ -4875,8 +4882,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(destroy_workqueue);
*/
void workqueue_set_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int max_active)
{
- struct pool_workqueue *pwq;
-
/* disallow meddling with max_active for ordered workqueues */
if (WARN_ON(wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT))
return;
@@ -4887,9 +4892,7 @@ void workqueue_set_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int max_active)
wq->flags &= ~__WQ_ORDERED;
wq->saved_max_active = max_active;
-
- for_each_pwq(pwq, wq)
- pwq_adjust_max_active(pwq);
+ wq_adjust_max_active(wq);
mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex);
}
@@ -5136,8 +5139,8 @@ static void show_pwq(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
pr_info(" pwq %d:", pool->id);
pr_cont_pool_info(pool);
- pr_cont(" active=%d/%d refcnt=%d%s\n",
- pwq->nr_active, pwq->max_active, pwq->refcnt,
+ pr_cont(" active=%d refcnt=%d%s\n",
+ pwq->nr_active, pwq->refcnt,
!list_empty(&pwq->mayday_node) ? " MAYDAY" : "");
hash_for_each(pool->busy_hash, bkt, worker, hentry) {
@@ -5685,7 +5688,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(work_on_cpu_safe_key);
void freeze_workqueues_begin(void)
{
struct workqueue_struct *wq;
- struct pool_workqueue *pwq;
mutex_lock(&wq_pool_mutex);
@@ -5694,8 +5696,7 @@ void freeze_workqueues_begin(void)
list_for_each_entry(wq, &workqueues, list) {
mutex_lock(&wq->mutex);
- for_each_pwq(pwq, wq)
- pwq_adjust_max_active(pwq);
+ wq_adjust_max_active(wq);
mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex);
}
@@ -5760,7 +5761,6 @@ bool freeze_workqueues_busy(void)
void thaw_workqueues(void)
{
struct workqueue_struct *wq;
- struct pool_workqueue *pwq;
mutex_lock(&wq_pool_mutex);
@@ -5772,8 +5772,7 @@ void thaw_workqueues(void)
/* restore max_active and repopulate worklist */
list_for_each_entry(wq, &workqueues, list) {
mutex_lock(&wq->mutex);
- for_each_pwq(pwq, wq)
- pwq_adjust_max_active(pwq);
+ wq_adjust_max_active(wq);
mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex);
}
--
2.43.0
wq_adjust_max_active() needs to activate work items after max_active is
increased. Previously, it did that by visiting each pwq once activating all
that could be activated. While this makes sense with per-pwq nr_active,
nr_active will be shared across multiple pwqs for unbound wqs. Then, we'd
want to round-robin through pwqs to be fairer.
In preparation, this patch makes wq_adjust_max_active() round-robin pwqs
while activating. While the activation ordering changes, this shouldn't
cause user-noticeable behavior changes.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
---
kernel/workqueue.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++------------
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 6a0ce3a3cca2..bfb6e951852a 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -4707,7 +4707,7 @@ static int init_rescuer(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
*/
static void wq_adjust_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
{
- struct pool_workqueue *pwq;
+ bool activated;
lockdep_assert_held(&wq->mutex);
@@ -4727,19 +4727,26 @@ static void wq_adjust_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
*/
WRITE_ONCE(wq->max_active, wq->saved_max_active);
- for_each_pwq(pwq, wq) {
- unsigned long flags;
-
- /* this function can be called during early boot w/ irq disabled */
- raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pwq->pool->lock, flags);
-
- while (pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq))
- ;
+ /*
+ * Round-robin through pwq's activating the first inactive work item
+ * until max_active is filled.
+ */
+ do {
+ struct pool_workqueue *pwq;
- kick_pool(pwq->pool);
+ activated = false;
+ for_each_pwq(pwq, wq) {
+ unsigned long flags;
- raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pwq->pool->lock, flags);
- }
+ /* can be called during early boot w/ irq disabled */
+ raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pwq->pool->lock, flags);
+ if (pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq)) {
+ activated = true;
+ kick_pool(pwq->pool);
+ }
+ raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pwq->pool->lock, flags);
+ }
+ } while (activated);
}
__printf(1, 4)
--
2.43.0
wq->cpu_pwq is RCU protected but wq->dfl_pwq isn't. This is okay because
currently wq->dfl_pwq is used only accessed to install it into wq->cpu_pwq
which doesn't require RCU access. However, we want to be able to access
wq->dfl_pwq under RCU in the future to access its __pod_cpumask and the code
can be made easier to read by making the two pwq fields behave in the same
way.
- Make wq->dfl_pwq RCU protected.
- Add unbound_pwq_slot() and unbound_pwq() which can access both ->dfl_pwq
and ->cpu_pwq. The former returns the double pointer that can be used
access and update the pwqs. The latter performs locking check and
dereferences the double pointer.
- pwq accesses and updates are converted to use unbound_pwq[_slot]().
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
---
kernel/workqueue.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index bfb6e951852a..1bca0a4ab9d1 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -304,7 +304,7 @@ struct workqueue_struct {
int saved_max_active; /* WQ: saved max_active */
struct workqueue_attrs *unbound_attrs; /* PW: only for unbound wqs */
- struct pool_workqueue *dfl_pwq; /* PW: only for unbound wqs */
+ struct pool_workqueue __rcu *dfl_pwq; /* PW: only for unbound wqs */
#ifdef CONFIG_SYSFS
struct wq_device *wq_dev; /* I: for sysfs interface */
@@ -635,6 +635,23 @@ static int worker_pool_assign_id(struct worker_pool *pool)
return ret;
}
+static struct pool_workqueue __rcu **
+unbound_pwq_slot(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int cpu)
+{
+ if (cpu >= 0)
+ return per_cpu_ptr(wq->cpu_pwq, cpu);
+ else
+ return &wq->dfl_pwq;
+}
+
+/* @cpu < 0 for dfl_pwq */
+static struct pool_workqueue *unbound_pwq(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int cpu)
+{
+ return rcu_dereference_check(*unbound_pwq_slot(wq, cpu),
+ lockdep_is_held(&wq_pool_mutex) ||
+ lockdep_is_held(&wq->mutex));
+}
+
static unsigned int work_color_to_flags(int color)
{
return color << WORK_STRUCT_COLOR_SHIFT;
@@ -4325,10 +4342,11 @@ static void wq_calc_pod_cpumask(struct workqueue_attrs *attrs, int cpu,
"possible intersect\n");
}
-/* install @pwq into @wq's cpu_pwq and return the old pwq */
+/* install @pwq into @wq and return the old pwq, @cpu < 0 for dfl_pwq */
static struct pool_workqueue *install_unbound_pwq(struct workqueue_struct *wq,
int cpu, struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
{
+ struct pool_workqueue __rcu **slot = unbound_pwq_slot(wq, cpu);
struct pool_workqueue *old_pwq;
lockdep_assert_held(&wq_pool_mutex);
@@ -4337,8 +4355,8 @@ static struct pool_workqueue *install_unbound_pwq(struct workqueue_struct *wq,
/* link_pwq() can handle duplicate calls */
link_pwq(pwq);
- old_pwq = rcu_access_pointer(*per_cpu_ptr(wq->cpu_pwq, cpu));
- rcu_assign_pointer(*per_cpu_ptr(wq->cpu_pwq, cpu), pwq);
+ old_pwq = rcu_access_pointer(*slot);
+ rcu_assign_pointer(*slot, pwq);
return old_pwq;
}
@@ -4438,14 +4456,11 @@ static void apply_wqattrs_commit(struct apply_wqattrs_ctx *ctx)
copy_workqueue_attrs(ctx->wq->unbound_attrs, ctx->attrs);
- /* save the previous pwq and install the new one */
+ /* save the previous pwqs and install the new ones */
for_each_possible_cpu(cpu)
ctx->pwq_tbl[cpu] = install_unbound_pwq(ctx->wq, cpu,
ctx->pwq_tbl[cpu]);
-
- /* @dfl_pwq might not have been used, ensure it's linked */
- link_pwq(ctx->dfl_pwq);
- swap(ctx->wq->dfl_pwq, ctx->dfl_pwq);
+ ctx->dfl_pwq = install_unbound_pwq(ctx->wq, -1, ctx->dfl_pwq);
mutex_unlock(&ctx->wq->mutex);
}
@@ -4555,9 +4570,7 @@ static void wq_update_pod(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int cpu,
/* nothing to do if the target cpumask matches the current pwq */
wq_calc_pod_cpumask(target_attrs, cpu, off_cpu);
- pwq = rcu_dereference_protected(*per_cpu_ptr(wq->cpu_pwq, cpu),
- lockdep_is_held(&wq_pool_mutex));
- if (wqattrs_equal(target_attrs, pwq->pool->attrs))
+ if (wqattrs_equal(target_attrs, unbound_pwq(wq, cpu)->pool->attrs))
return;
/* create a new pwq */
@@ -4575,10 +4588,11 @@ static void wq_update_pod(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int cpu,
use_dfl_pwq:
mutex_lock(&wq->mutex);
- raw_spin_lock_irq(&wq->dfl_pwq->pool->lock);
- get_pwq(wq->dfl_pwq);
- raw_spin_unlock_irq(&wq->dfl_pwq->pool->lock);
- old_pwq = install_unbound_pwq(wq, cpu, wq->dfl_pwq);
+ pwq = unbound_pwq(wq, -1);
+ raw_spin_lock_irq(&pwq->pool->lock);
+ get_pwq(pwq);
+ raw_spin_unlock_irq(&pwq->pool->lock);
+ old_pwq = install_unbound_pwq(wq, cpu, pwq);
out_unlock:
mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex);
put_pwq_unlocked(old_pwq);
@@ -4616,10 +4630,13 @@ static int alloc_and_link_pwqs(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
cpus_read_lock();
if (wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED) {
+ struct pool_workqueue *dfl_pwq;
+
ret = apply_workqueue_attrs(wq, ordered_wq_attrs[highpri]);
/* there should only be single pwq for ordering guarantee */
- WARN(!ret && (wq->pwqs.next != &wq->dfl_pwq->pwqs_node ||
- wq->pwqs.prev != &wq->dfl_pwq->pwqs_node),
+ dfl_pwq = rcu_access_pointer(wq->dfl_pwq);
+ WARN(!ret && (wq->pwqs.next != &dfl_pwq->pwqs_node ||
+ wq->pwqs.prev != &dfl_pwq->pwqs_node),
"ordering guarantee broken for workqueue %s\n", wq->name);
} else {
ret = apply_workqueue_attrs(wq, unbound_std_wq_attrs[highpri]);
@@ -4853,7 +4870,7 @@ static bool pwq_busy(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
if (pwq->nr_in_flight[i])
return true;
- if ((pwq != pwq->wq->dfl_pwq) && (pwq->refcnt > 1))
+ if ((pwq != rcu_access_pointer(pwq->wq->dfl_pwq)) && (pwq->refcnt > 1))
return true;
if (!pwq_is_empty(pwq))
return true;
@@ -4937,13 +4954,12 @@ void destroy_workqueue(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
rcu_read_lock();
for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
- pwq = rcu_access_pointer(*per_cpu_ptr(wq->cpu_pwq, cpu));
- RCU_INIT_POINTER(*per_cpu_ptr(wq->cpu_pwq, cpu), NULL);
- put_pwq_unlocked(pwq);
+ put_pwq_unlocked(unbound_pwq(wq, cpu));
+ RCU_INIT_POINTER(*unbound_pwq_slot(wq, cpu), NULL);
}
- put_pwq_unlocked(wq->dfl_pwq);
- wq->dfl_pwq = NULL;
+ put_pwq_unlocked(unbound_pwq(wq, -1));
+ RCU_INIT_POINTER(*unbound_pwq_slot(wq, -1), NULL);
rcu_read_unlock();
}
--
2.43.0
Print out per-node nr/max_active numbers to improve visibility into
node_nr_active operations.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
---
tools/workqueue/wq_dump.py | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/workqueue/wq_dump.py b/tools/workqueue/wq_dump.py
index 333b2fc00b82..bd381511bd9a 100644
--- a/tools/workqueue/wq_dump.py
+++ b/tools/workqueue/wq_dump.py
@@ -50,6 +50,7 @@ import drgn
from drgn.helpers.linux.list import list_for_each_entry,list_empty
from drgn.helpers.linux.percpu import per_cpu_ptr
from drgn.helpers.linux.cpumask import for_each_cpu,for_each_possible_cpu
+from drgn.helpers.linux.nodemask import for_each_node
from drgn.helpers.linux.idr import idr_for_each
import argparse
@@ -107,7 +108,6 @@ WQ_AFFN_NUMA = prog['WQ_AFFN_NUMA']
WQ_AFFN_SYSTEM = prog['WQ_AFFN_SYSTEM']
WQ_NAME_LEN = prog['WQ_NAME_LEN'].value_()
-
cpumask_str_len = len(cpumask_str(wq_unbound_cpumask))
print('Affinity Scopes')
@@ -205,3 +205,42 @@ print(f'[{"workqueue":^{WQ_NAME_LEN-2}}\\ {"unbound_cpus":{ucpus_len}} pid {"
print(f' {wq.rescuer.task.pid.value_():6}', end='')
print(f' {cpumask_str(wq.rescuer.task.cpus_ptr):{rcpus_len}}', end='')
print('')
+
+print('')
+print('Unbound workqueue -> node_nr/max_active')
+print('=======================================')
+
+if 'node_to_cpumask_map' in prog:
+ __cpu_online_mask = prog['__cpu_online_mask']
+ node_to_cpumask_map = prog['node_to_cpumask_map']
+ nr_node_ids = prog['nr_node_ids'].value_()
+
+ print(f'online_cpus={cpumask_str(__cpu_online_mask.address_of_())}')
+ for node in for_each_node():
+ print(f'NODE[{node:02}]={cpumask_str(node_to_cpumask_map[node])}')
+ print('')
+
+ print(f'[{"workqueue":^{WQ_NAME_LEN-2}}\\ min max', end='')
+ first = True
+ for node in for_each_node():
+ if first:
+ print(f' NODE {node}', end='')
+ first = False
+ else:
+ print(f' {node:7}', end='')
+ print(f' {"dfl":>7} ]')
+ print('')
+
+ for wq in list_for_each_entry('struct workqueue_struct', workqueues.address_of_(), 'list'):
+ if not (wq.flags & WQ_UNBOUND):
+ continue
+
+ print(f'{wq.name.string_().decode():{WQ_NAME_LEN}} ', end='')
+ print(f'{wq.min_active.value_():3} {wq.max_active.value_():3}', end='')
+ for node in for_each_node():
+ nna = wq.node_nr_active[node]
+ print(f' {nna.nr.counter.value_():3}/{nna.max.value_():3}', end='')
+ nna = wq.node_nr_active[nr_node_ids]
+ print(f' {nna.nr.counter.value_():3}/{nna.max.value_():3}')
+else:
+ printf(f'node_to_cpumask_map not present, is NUMA enabled?')
--
2.43.0
A pool_workqueue (pwq) represents the connection between a workqueue and a
worker_pool. One of the roles that a pwq plays is enforcement of the
max_active concurrency limit. Before 636b927eba5b ("workqueue: Make unbound
workqueues to use per-cpu pool_workqueues"), there was one pwq per each CPU
for per-cpu workqueues and per each NUMA node for unbound workqueues, which
was a natural result of per-cpu workqueues being served by per-cpu pools and
unbound by per-NUMA pools.
In terms of max_active enforcement, this was, while not perfect, workable.
For per-cpu workqueues, it was fine. For unbound, it wasn't great in that
NUMA machines would get max_active that's multiplied by the number of nodes
but didn't cause huge problems because NUMA machines are relatively rare and
the node count is usually pretty low.
However, cache layouts are more complex now and sharing a worker pool across
a whole node didn't really work well for unbound workqueues. Thus, a series
of commits culminating on 8639ecebc9b1 ("workqueue: Make unbound workqueues
to use per-cpu pool_workqueues") implemented more flexible affinity
mechanism for unbound workqueues which enables using e.g. last-level-cache
aligned pools. In the process, 636b927eba5b ("workqueue: Make unbound
workqueues to use per-cpu pool_workqueues") made unbound workqueues use
per-cpu pwqs like per-cpu workqueues.
While the change was necessary to enable more flexible affinity scopes, this
came with the side effect of blowing up the effective max_active for unbound
workqueues. Before, the effective max_active for unbound workqueues was
multiplied by the number of nodes. After, by the number of CPUs.
636b927eba5b ("workqueue: Make unbound workqueues to use per-cpu
pool_workqueues") claims that this should generally be okay. It is okay for
users which self-regulates concurrency level which are the vast majority;
however, there are enough use cases which actually depend on max_active to
prevent the level of concurrency from going bonkers including several IO
handling workqueues that can issue a work item for each in-flight IO. With
targeted benchmarks, the misbehavior can easily be exposed as reported in
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/dbu6wiwu3sdhmhikb2w6lns7b27gbobfavhjj57kwi2quafgwl@htjcc5oikcr3.
Unfortunately, there is no way to express what these use cases need using
per-cpu max_active. A CPU may issue most of in-flight IOs, so we don't want
to set max_active too low but as soon as we increase max_active a bit, we
can end up with unreasonable number of in-flight work items when many CPUs
issue IOs at the same time. ie. The acceptable lowest max_active is higher
than the acceptable highest max_active.
Ideally, max_active for an unbound workqueue should be system-wide so that
the users can regulate the total level of concurrency regardless of node and
cache layout. The reasons workqueue hasn't implemented that yet are:
- One max_active enforcement decouples from pool boundaires, chaining
execution after a work item finishes requires inter-pool operations which
would require lock dancing, which is nasty.
- Sharing a single nr_active count across the whole system can be pretty
expensive on NUMA machines.
- Per-pwq enforcement had been more or less okay while we were using
per-node pools.
It looks like we no longer can avoid decoupling max_active enforcement from
pool boundaries. This patch implements system-wide nr_active mechanism with
the following design characteristics:
- To avoid sharing a single counter across multiple nodes, the configured
max_active is split across nodes according to the proportion of each
workqueue's online effective CPUs per node. e.g. A node with twice more
online effective CPUs will get twice higher portion of max_active.
- Workqueue used to be able to process a chain of interdependent work items
which is as long as max_active. We can't do this anymore as max_active is
distributed across the nodes. Instead, a new parameter min_active is
introduced which determines the minimum level of concurrency within a node
regardless of how max_active distribution comes out to be.
It is set to the smaller of max_active and WQ_DFL_MIN_ACTIVE which is 8.
This can lead to higher effective max_weight than configured and also
deadlocks if a workqueue was depending on being able to handle chains of
interdependent work items that are longer than 8.
I believe these should be fine given that the number of CPUs in each NUMA
node is usually higher than 8 and work item chain longer than 8 is pretty
unlikely. However, if these assumptions turn out to be wrong, we'll need
to add an interface to adjust min_active.
- Each unbound wq has an array of struct wq_node_nr_active which tracks
per-node nr_active. When its pwq wants to run a work item, it has to
obtain the matching node's nr_active. If over the node's max_active, the
pwq is queued on wq_node_nr_active->pending_pwqs. As work items finish,
the completion path round-robins the pending pwqs activating the first
inactive work item of each, which involves some pool lock dancing and
kicking other pools. It's not the simplest code but doesn't look too bad.
v3: - wq_node_max_active() used to calculate per-node max_active on the fly
based on system-wide CPU online states. Lai pointed out that this can
lead to skewed distributions for workqueues with restricted cpumasks.
Update the max_active distribution to use per-workqueue effective
online CPU counts instead of system-wide and cache the calculation
results in node_nr_active->max.
v2: - wq->min/max_active now uses WRITE/READ_ONCE() as suggested by Lai.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Reported-by: Naohiro Aota <[email protected]>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/dbu6wiwu3sdhmhikb2w6lns7b27gbobfavhjj57kwi2quafgwl@htjcc5oikcr3
Fixes: 636b927eba5b ("workqueue: Make unbound workqueues to use per-cpu pool_workqueues")
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <[email protected]>
---
include/linux/workqueue.h | 35 ++++-
kernel/workqueue.c | 321 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
2 files changed, 323 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/workqueue.h b/include/linux/workqueue.h
index 2cc0a9606175..515e7958c6c1 100644
--- a/include/linux/workqueue.h
+++ b/include/linux/workqueue.h
@@ -391,6 +391,13 @@ enum {
WQ_MAX_ACTIVE = 512, /* I like 512, better ideas? */
WQ_UNBOUND_MAX_ACTIVE = WQ_MAX_ACTIVE,
WQ_DFL_ACTIVE = WQ_MAX_ACTIVE / 2,
+
+ /*
+ * Per-node default cap on min_active. Unless explicitly set, min_active
+ * is set to min(max_active, WQ_DFL_MIN_ACTIVE). For more details, see
+ * workqueue_struct->min_active definition.
+ */
+ WQ_DFL_MIN_ACTIVE = 8,
};
/*
@@ -433,11 +440,33 @@ extern struct workqueue_struct *system_freezable_power_efficient_wq;
* alloc_workqueue - allocate a workqueue
* @fmt: printf format for the name of the workqueue
* @flags: WQ_* flags
- * @max_active: max in-flight work items per CPU, 0 for default
+ * @max_active: max in-flight work items, 0 for default
* remaining args: args for @fmt
*
- * Allocate a workqueue with the specified parameters. For detailed
- * information on WQ_* flags, please refer to
+ * For a per-cpu workqueue, @max_active limits the number of in-flight work
+ * items for each CPU. e.g. @max_active of 1 indicates that each CPU can be
+ * executing at most one work item for the workqueue.
+ *
+ * For unbound workqueues, @max_active limits the number of in-flight work items
+ * for the whole system. e.g. @max_active of 16 indicates that that there can be
+ * at most 16 work items executing for the workqueue in the whole system.
+ *
+ * As sharing the same active counter for an unbound workqueue across multiple
+ * NUMA nodes can be expensive, @max_active is distributed to each NUMA node
+ * according to the proportion of the number of online CPUs and enforced
+ * independently.
+ *
+ * Depending on online CPU distribution, a node may end up with per-node
+ * max_active which is significantly lower than @max_active, which can lead to
+ * deadlocks if the per-node concurrency limit is lower than the maximum number
+ * of interdependent work items for the workqueue.
+ *
+ * To guarantee forward progress regardless of online CPU distribution, the
+ * concurrency limit on every node is guaranteed to be equal to or greater than
+ * min_active which is set to min(@max_active, %WQ_DFL_MIN_ACTIVE). This means
+ * that the sum of per-node max_active's may be larger than @max_active.
+ *
+ * For detailed information on %WQ_* flags, please refer to
* Documentation/core-api/workqueue.rst.
*
* RETURNS:
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 3c9daa264265..16f4f5d450b9 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -122,6 +122,9 @@ enum {
*
* L: pool->lock protected. Access with pool->lock held.
*
+ * LN: pool->lock and wq_node_nr_active->lock protected for writes. Either for
+ * reads.
+ *
* K: Only modified by worker while holding pool->lock. Can be safely read by
* self, while holding pool->lock or from IRQ context if %current is the
* kworker.
@@ -243,17 +246,18 @@ struct pool_workqueue {
* pwq->inactive_works instead of pool->worklist and marked with
* WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE.
*
- * All work items marked with WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE do not participate
- * in pwq->nr_active and all work items in pwq->inactive_works are
- * marked with WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE. But not all WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE
- * work items are in pwq->inactive_works. Some of them are ready to
- * run in pool->worklist or worker->scheduled. Those work itmes are
- * only struct wq_barrier which is used for flush_work() and should
- * not participate in pwq->nr_active. For non-barrier work item, it
- * is marked with WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE iff it is in pwq->inactive_works.
+ * All work items marked with WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE do not participate in
+ * nr_active and all work items in pwq->inactive_works are marked with
+ * WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE. But not all WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE work items are
+ * in pwq->inactive_works. Some of them are ready to run in
+ * pool->worklist or worker->scheduled. Those work itmes are only struct
+ * wq_barrier which is used for flush_work() and should not participate
+ * in nr_active. For non-barrier work item, it is marked with
+ * WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE iff it is in pwq->inactive_works.
*/
int nr_active; /* L: nr of active works */
struct list_head inactive_works; /* L: inactive works */
+ struct list_head pending_node; /* LN: node on wq_node_nr_active->pending_pwqs */
struct list_head pwqs_node; /* WR: node on wq->pwqs */
struct list_head mayday_node; /* MD: node on wq->maydays */
@@ -285,9 +289,19 @@ struct wq_device;
* on each CPU, in an unbound workqueue, max_active applies to the whole system.
* As sharing a single nr_active across multiple sockets can be very expensive,
* the counting and enforcement is per NUMA node.
+ *
+ * The following struct is used to enforce per-node max_active. When a pwq wants
+ * to start executing a work item, it should increment ->nr using
+ * tryinc_node_nr_active(). If acquisition fails due to ->nr already being over
+ * ->max, the pwq is queued on ->pending_pwqs. As in-flight work items finish
+ * and decrement ->nr, node_activate_pending_pwq() activates the pending pwqs in
+ * round-robin order.
*/
struct wq_node_nr_active {
- atomic_t nr; /* per-node nr_active count */
+ int max; /* per-node max_active */
+ atomic_t nr; /* per-node nr_active */
+ raw_spinlock_t lock; /* nests inside pool locks */
+ struct list_head pending_pwqs; /* LN: pwqs with inactive works */
};
/*
@@ -310,8 +324,12 @@ struct workqueue_struct {
struct worker *rescuer; /* MD: rescue worker */
int nr_drainers; /* WQ: drain in progress */
+
+ /* See alloc_workqueue() function comment for info on min/max_active */
int max_active; /* WO: max active works */
+ int min_active; /* WO: min active works */
int saved_max_active; /* WQ: saved max_active */
+ int saved_min_active; /* WQ: saved min_active */
struct workqueue_attrs *unbound_attrs; /* PW: only for unbound wqs */
struct pool_workqueue __rcu *dfl_pwq; /* PW: only for unbound wqs */
@@ -663,6 +681,19 @@ static struct pool_workqueue *unbound_pwq(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int cpu)
lockdep_is_held(&wq->mutex));
}
+/**
+ * unbound_effective_cpumask - effective cpumask of an unbound workqueue
+ * @wq: workqueue of interest
+ *
+ * @wq->unbound_attrs->cpumask contains the cpumask requested by the user which
+ * is masked with wq_unbound_cpumask to determine the effective cpumask. The
+ * default pwq is always mapped to the pool with the current effective cpumask.
+ */
+static struct cpumask *unbound_effective_cpumask(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
+{
+ return unbound_pwq(wq, -1)->pool->attrs->__pod_cpumask;
+}
+
static unsigned int work_color_to_flags(int color)
{
return color << WORK_STRUCT_COLOR_SHIFT;
@@ -1457,6 +1488,46 @@ static struct wq_node_nr_active *wq_node_nr_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq,
return wq->node_nr_active[node];
}
+/**
+ * wq_update_node_max_active - Update per-node max_actives to use
+ * @wq: workqueue to update
+ * @off_cpu: CPU that's going down, -1 if a CPU is not going down
+ *
+ * Update @wq->node_nr_active[]->max. @wq must be unbound. max_active is
+ * distributed among nodes according to the proportions of numbers of online
+ * cpus. The result is always between @wq->min_active and max_active.
+ */
+static void wq_update_node_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int off_cpu)
+{
+ struct cpumask *effective = unbound_effective_cpumask(wq);
+ int min_active = READ_ONCE(wq->min_active);
+ int max_active = READ_ONCE(wq->max_active);
+ int total_cpus, node;
+
+ lockdep_assert_held(&wq_pool_mutex);
+
+ if (!cpumask_test_cpu(off_cpu, effective))
+ off_cpu = -1;
+
+ total_cpus = cpumask_weight_and(effective, cpu_online_mask);
+ if (off_cpu >= 0)
+ total_cpus--;
+
+ for_each_node(node) {
+ int node_cpus;
+
+ node_cpus = cpumask_weight_and(effective, cpumask_of_node(node));
+ if (off_cpu >= 0 && cpu_to_node(off_cpu) == node)
+ node_cpus--;
+
+ wq_node_nr_active(wq, node)->max =
+ clamp(DIV_ROUND_UP(max_active * node_cpus, total_cpus),
+ min_active, max_active);
+ }
+
+ wq_node_nr_active(wq, NUMA_NO_NODE)->max = min_active;
+}
+
/**
* get_pwq - get an extra reference on the specified pool_workqueue
* @pwq: pool_workqueue to get
@@ -1554,35 +1625,98 @@ static bool pwq_activate_work(struct pool_workqueue *pwq,
return true;
}
+static bool tryinc_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active *nna)
+{
+ int max = READ_ONCE(nna->max);
+
+ while (true) {
+ int old, tmp;
+
+ old = atomic_read(&nna->nr);
+ if (old >= max)
+ return false;
+ tmp = atomic_cmpxchg_relaxed(&nna->nr, old, old + 1);
+ if (tmp == old)
+ return true;
+ }
+}
+
/**
* pwq_tryinc_nr_active - Try to increment nr_active for a pwq
* @pwq: pool_workqueue of interest
+ * @fill: max_active may have increased, try to increase concurrency level
*
* Try to increment nr_active for @pwq. Returns %true if an nr_active count is
* successfully obtained. %false otherwise.
*/
-static bool pwq_tryinc_nr_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
+static bool pwq_tryinc_nr_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq, bool fill)
{
struct workqueue_struct *wq = pwq->wq;
struct worker_pool *pool = pwq->pool;
struct wq_node_nr_active *nna = wq_node_nr_active(wq, pool->node);
- bool obtained;
+ bool obtained = false;
lockdep_assert_held(&pool->lock);
- obtained = pwq->nr_active < READ_ONCE(wq->max_active);
+ if (!nna) {
+ /* per-cpu workqueue, pwq->nr_active is sufficient */
+ obtained = pwq->nr_active < READ_ONCE(wq->max_active);
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * Unbound workqueue uses per-node shared nr_active $nna. If @pwq is
+ * already waiting on $nna, pwq_dec_nr_active() will maintain the
+ * concurrency level. Don't jump the line.
+ *
+ * We need to ignore the pending test after max_active has increased as
+ * pwq_dec_nr_active() can only maintain the concurrency level but not
+ * increase it. This is indicated by @fill.
+ */
+ if (!list_empty(&pwq->pending_node) && likely(!fill))
+ goto out;
+
+ obtained = tryinc_node_nr_active(nna);
+ if (obtained)
+ goto out;
+
+ /*
+ * Lockless acquisition failed. Lock, add ourself to $nna->pending_pwqs
+ * and try again. The smp_mb() is paired with the implied memory barrier
+ * of atomic_dec_return() in pwq_dec_nr_active() to ensure that either
+ * we see the decremented $nna->nr or they see non-empty
+ * $nna->pending_pwqs.
+ */
+ raw_spin_lock(&nna->lock);
+
+ if (list_empty(&pwq->pending_node))
+ list_add_tail(&pwq->pending_node, &nna->pending_pwqs);
+ else if (likely(!fill))
+ goto out_unlock;
+
+ smp_mb();
+
+ obtained = tryinc_node_nr_active(nna);
+
+ /*
+ * If @fill, @pwq might have already been pending. Being spuriously
+ * pending in cold paths doesn't affect anything. Let's leave it be.
+ */
+ if (obtained && likely(!fill))
+ list_del_init(&pwq->pending_node);
- if (obtained) {
+out_unlock:
+ raw_spin_unlock(&nna->lock);
+out:
+ if (obtained)
pwq->nr_active++;
- if (nna)
- atomic_inc(&nna->nr);
- }
return obtained;
}
/**
* pwq_activate_first_inactive - Activate the first inactive work item on a pwq
* @pwq: pool_workqueue of interest
+ * @fill: max_active may have increased, try to increase concurrency level
*
* Activate the first inactive work item of @pwq if available and allowed by
* max_active limit.
@@ -1590,13 +1724,13 @@ static bool pwq_tryinc_nr_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
* Returns %true if an inactive work item has been activated. %false if no
* inactive work item is found or max_active limit is reached.
*/
-static bool pwq_activate_first_inactive(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
+static bool pwq_activate_first_inactive(struct pool_workqueue *pwq, bool fill)
{
struct work_struct *work =
list_first_entry_or_null(&pwq->inactive_works,
struct work_struct, entry);
- if (work && pwq_tryinc_nr_active(pwq)) {
+ if (work && pwq_tryinc_nr_active(pwq, fill)) {
__pwq_activate_work(pwq, work);
return true;
} else {
@@ -1604,11 +1738,93 @@ static bool pwq_activate_first_inactive(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
}
}
+/**
+ * node_activate_pending_pwq - Activate a pending pwq on a wq_node_nr_active
+ * @nna: wq_node_nr_active to activate a pending pwq for
+ * @caller_pool: worker_pool the caller is locking
+ *
+ * Activate a pwq in @nna->pending_pwqs. Called with @caller_pool locked.
+ * @caller_pool may be unlocked and relocked to lock other worker_pools.
+ */
+static void node_activate_pending_pwq(struct wq_node_nr_active *nna,
+ struct worker_pool *caller_pool)
+{
+ struct worker_pool *locked_pool = caller_pool;
+ struct pool_workqueue *pwq;
+ struct work_struct *work;
+
+ lockdep_assert_held(&caller_pool->lock);
+
+ raw_spin_lock(&nna->lock);
+retry:
+ pwq = list_first_entry_or_null(&nna->pending_pwqs,
+ struct pool_workqueue, pending_node);
+ if (!pwq)
+ goto out_unlock;
+
+ /*
+ * If @pwq is for a different pool than @locked_pool, we need to lock
+ * @pwq->pool->lock. Let's trylock first. If unsuccessful, do the unlock
+ * / lock dance. For that, we also need to release @nna->lock as it's
+ * nested inside pool locks.
+ */
+ if (pwq->pool != locked_pool) {
+ raw_spin_unlock(&locked_pool->lock);
+ locked_pool = pwq->pool;
+ if (!raw_spin_trylock(&locked_pool->lock)) {
+ raw_spin_unlock(&nna->lock);
+ raw_spin_lock(&locked_pool->lock);
+ raw_spin_lock(&nna->lock);
+ goto retry;
+ }
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * $pwq may not have any inactive work items due to e.g. cancellations.
+ * Drop it from pending_pwqs and see if there's another one.
+ */
+ work = list_first_entry_or_null(&pwq->inactive_works,
+ struct work_struct, entry);
+ if (!work) {
+ list_del_init(&pwq->pending_node);
+ goto retry;
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * Acquire an nr_active count and activate the inactive work item. If
+ * $pwq still has inactive work items, rotate it to the end of the
+ * pending_pwqs so that we round-robin through them. This means that
+ * inactive work items are not activated in queueing order which is fine
+ * given that there has never been any ordering across different pwqs.
+ */
+ if (likely(tryinc_node_nr_active(nna))) {
+ pwq->nr_active++;
+ __pwq_activate_work(pwq, work);
+
+ if (list_empty(&pwq->inactive_works))
+ list_del_init(&pwq->pending_node);
+ else
+ list_move_tail(&pwq->pending_node, &nna->pending_pwqs);
+
+ /* if activating a foreign pool, make sure it's running */
+ if (pwq->pool != caller_pool)
+ kick_pool(pwq->pool);
+ }
+
+out_unlock:
+ raw_spin_unlock(&nna->lock);
+ if (locked_pool != caller_pool) {
+ raw_spin_unlock(&locked_pool->lock);
+ raw_spin_lock(&caller_pool->lock);
+ }
+}
+
/**
* pwq_dec_nr_active - Retire an active count
* @pwq: pool_workqueue of interest
*
* Decrement @pwq's nr_active and try to activate the first inactive work item.
+ * For unbound workqueues, this function may temporarily drop @pwq->pool->lock.
*/
static void pwq_dec_nr_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
{
@@ -1628,12 +1844,29 @@ static void pwq_dec_nr_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
* inactive work item on @pwq itself.
*/
if (!nna) {
- pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq);
+ pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq, false);
return;
}
- atomic_dec(&nna->nr);
- pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq);
+ /*
+ * If @pwq is for an unbound workqueue, it's more complicated because
+ * multiple pwqs and pools may be sharing the nr_active count. When a
+ * pwq needs to wait for an nr_active count, it puts itself on
+ * $nna->pending_pwqs. The following atomic_dec_return()'s implied
+ * memory barrier is paired with smp_mb() in pwq_tryinc_nr_active() to
+ * guarantee that either we see non-empty pending_pwqs or they see
+ * decremented $nna->nr.
+ *
+ * $nna->max may change as CPUs come online/offline and @pwq->wq's
+ * max_active gets updated. However, it is guaranteed to be equal to or
+ * larger than @pwq->wq->min_active which is above zero unless freezing.
+ * This maintains the forward progress guarantee.
+ */
+ if (atomic_dec_return(&nna->nr) >= READ_ONCE(nna->max))
+ return;
+
+ if (!list_empty(&nna->pending_pwqs))
+ node_activate_pending_pwq(nna, pool);
}
/**
@@ -1961,7 +2194,7 @@ static void __queue_work(int cpu, struct workqueue_struct *wq,
* @work must also queue behind existing inactive work items to maintain
* ordering when max_active changes. See wq_adjust_max_active().
*/
- if (list_empty(&pwq->inactive_works) && pwq_tryinc_nr_active(pwq)) {
+ if (list_empty(&pwq->inactive_works) && pwq_tryinc_nr_active(pwq, false)) {
if (list_empty(&pool->worklist))
pool->watchdog_ts = jiffies;
@@ -3197,7 +3430,7 @@ static void insert_wq_barrier(struct pool_workqueue *pwq,
barr->task = current;
- /* The barrier work item does not participate in pwq->nr_active. */
+ /* The barrier work item does not participate in nr_active. */
work_flags |= WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE;
/*
@@ -4113,6 +4346,8 @@ static void free_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active **nna_ar)
static void init_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active *nna)
{
atomic_set(&nna->nr, 0);
+ raw_spin_lock_init(&nna->lock);
+ INIT_LIST_HEAD(&nna->pending_pwqs);
}
/*
@@ -4350,6 +4585,15 @@ static void pwq_release_workfn(struct kthread_work *work)
mutex_unlock(&wq_pool_mutex);
}
+ if (!list_empty(&pwq->pending_node)) {
+ struct wq_node_nr_active *nna =
+ wq_node_nr_active(pwq->wq, pwq->pool->node);
+
+ raw_spin_lock_irq(&nna->lock);
+ list_del_init(&pwq->pending_node);
+ raw_spin_unlock_irq(&nna->lock);
+ }
+
call_rcu(&pwq->rcu, rcu_free_pwq);
/*
@@ -4375,6 +4619,7 @@ static void init_pwq(struct pool_workqueue *pwq, struct workqueue_struct *wq,
pwq->flush_color = -1;
pwq->refcnt = 1;
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pwq->inactive_works);
+ INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pwq->pending_node);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pwq->pwqs_node);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pwq->mayday_node);
kthread_init_work(&pwq->release_work, pwq_release_workfn);
@@ -4582,6 +4827,9 @@ static void apply_wqattrs_commit(struct apply_wqattrs_ctx *ctx)
ctx->pwq_tbl[cpu]);
ctx->dfl_pwq = install_unbound_pwq(ctx->wq, -1, ctx->dfl_pwq);
+ /* update node_nr_active->max */
+ wq_update_node_max_active(ctx->wq, -1);
+
mutex_unlock(&ctx->wq->mutex);
}
@@ -4853,16 +5101,18 @@ static void wq_adjust_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
return;
}
- if (wq->max_active == wq->saved_max_active)
+ if (wq->max_active == wq->saved_max_active &&
+ wq->min_active == wq->saved_min_active)
return;
/*
- * Update @wq->max_active and then kick inactive work items if more
+ * Update @wq->max/min_active and then kick inactive work items if more
* active work items are allowed. This doesn't break work item ordering
* because new work items are always queued behind existing inactive
* work items if there are any.
*/
WRITE_ONCE(wq->max_active, wq->saved_max_active);
+ WRITE_ONCE(wq->min_active, wq->saved_min_active);
/*
* Round-robin through pwq's activating the first inactive work item
@@ -4877,7 +5127,7 @@ static void wq_adjust_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
/* can be called during early boot w/ irq disabled */
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pwq->pool->lock, flags);
- if (pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq)) {
+ if (pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq, true)) {
activated = true;
kick_pool(pwq->pool);
}
@@ -4939,7 +5189,9 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
/* init wq */
wq->flags = flags;
wq->max_active = max_active;
- wq->saved_max_active = max_active;
+ wq->min_active = min(max_active, WQ_DFL_MIN_ACTIVE);
+ wq->saved_max_active = wq->max_active;
+ wq->saved_min_active = wq->min_active;
mutex_init(&wq->mutex);
atomic_set(&wq->nr_pwqs_to_flush, 0);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&wq->pwqs);
@@ -5104,7 +5356,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(destroy_workqueue);
* @wq: target workqueue
* @max_active: new max_active value.
*
- * Set max_active of @wq to @max_active.
+ * Set max_active of @wq to @max_active. See the alloc_workqueue() function
+ * comment.
*
* CONTEXT:
* Don't call from IRQ context.
@@ -5121,6 +5374,9 @@ void workqueue_set_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int max_active)
wq->flags &= ~__WQ_ORDERED;
wq->saved_max_active = max_active;
+ if (wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND)
+ wq->saved_min_active = min(wq->saved_min_active, max_active);
+
wq_adjust_max_active(wq);
mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex);
@@ -5802,6 +6058,8 @@ int workqueue_online_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
for_each_cpu(tcpu, pt->pod_cpus[pt->cpu_pod[cpu]])
wq_update_pod(wq, tcpu, cpu, true);
+
+ wq_update_node_max_active(wq, -1);
}
}
@@ -5830,6 +6088,8 @@ int workqueue_offline_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
for_each_cpu(tcpu, pt->pod_cpus[pt->cpu_pod[cpu]])
wq_update_pod(wq, tcpu, cpu, false);
+
+ wq_update_node_max_active(wq, cpu);
}
}
mutex_unlock(&wq_pool_mutex);
@@ -7121,9 +7381,10 @@ void __init workqueue_init_topology(void)
* combinations to apply per-pod sharing.
*/
list_for_each_entry(wq, &workqueues, list) {
- for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
+ for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
wq_update_pod(wq, cpu, cpu, true);
- }
+ if (wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND)
+ wq_update_node_max_active(wq, -1);
}
mutex_unlock(&wq_pool_mutex);
--
2.43.0
"!pwq->nr_active && list_empty(&pwq->inactive_works)" test is repeated
multiple times. Let's factor it out into pwq_is_empty().
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
---
kernel/workqueue.c | 13 +++++++++----
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 67d9ac1f0990..9e75535c4aeb 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -1456,6 +1456,11 @@ static void put_pwq_unlocked(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
}
}
+static bool pwq_is_empty(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
+{
+ return !pwq->nr_active && list_empty(&pwq->inactive_works);
+}
+
static void pwq_activate_inactive_work(struct work_struct *work)
{
struct pool_workqueue *pwq = get_work_pwq(work);
@@ -3326,7 +3331,7 @@ void drain_workqueue(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
bool drained;
raw_spin_lock_irq(&pwq->pool->lock);
- drained = !pwq->nr_active && list_empty(&pwq->inactive_works);
+ drained = pwq_is_empty(pwq);
raw_spin_unlock_irq(&pwq->pool->lock);
if (drained)
@@ -4776,7 +4781,7 @@ static bool pwq_busy(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
if ((pwq != pwq->wq->dfl_pwq) && (pwq->refcnt > 1))
return true;
- if (pwq->nr_active || !list_empty(&pwq->inactive_works))
+ if (!pwq_is_empty(pwq))
return true;
return false;
@@ -5214,7 +5219,7 @@ void show_one_workqueue(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
unsigned long flags;
for_each_pwq(pwq, wq) {
- if (pwq->nr_active || !list_empty(&pwq->inactive_works)) {
+ if (!pwq_is_empty(pwq)) {
idle = false;
break;
}
@@ -5226,7 +5231,7 @@ void show_one_workqueue(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
for_each_pwq(pwq, wq) {
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pwq->pool->lock, flags);
- if (pwq->nr_active || !list_empty(&pwq->inactive_works)) {
+ if (!pwq_is_empty(pwq)) {
/*
* Defer printing to avoid deadlocks in console
* drivers that queue work while holding locks
--
2.43.0
The planned shared nr_active handling for unbound workqueues will make
pwq_dec_nr_active() sometimes drop the pool lock temporarily to acquire
other pool locks, which is necessary as retirement of an nr_active count
from one pool may need kick off an inactive work item in another pool.
This patch moves pwq_dec_nr_in_flight() call in try_to_grab_pending() to the
end of work item handling so that work item state changes stay atomic.
process_one_work() which is the other user of pwq_dec_nr_in_flight() already
calls it at the end of work item handling. Comments are added to both call
sites and pwq_dec_nr_in_flight().
This shouldn't cause any behavior changes.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
---
kernel/workqueue.c | 11 ++++++++++-
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 1bca0a4ab9d1..38d4957b08d1 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -1583,6 +1583,11 @@ static void pwq_dec_nr_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
* A work either has completed or is removed from pending queue,
* decrement nr_in_flight of its pwq and handle workqueue flushing.
*
+ * NOTE:
+ * For unbound workqueues, this function may temporarily drop @pwq->pool->lock
+ * and thus should be called after all other state updates for the in-flight
+ * work item is complete.
+ *
* CONTEXT:
* raw_spin_lock_irq(pool->lock).
*/
@@ -1707,11 +1712,13 @@ static int try_to_grab_pending(struct work_struct *work, bool is_dwork,
pwq_activate_work(pwq, work);
list_del_init(&work->entry);
- pwq_dec_nr_in_flight(pwq, *work_data_bits(work));
/* work->data points to pwq iff queued, point to pool */
set_work_pool_and_keep_pending(work, pool->id);
+ /* must be the last step, see the function comment */
+ pwq_dec_nr_in_flight(pwq, *work_data_bits(work));
+
raw_spin_unlock(&pool->lock);
rcu_read_unlock();
return 1;
@@ -2777,6 +2784,8 @@ __acquires(&pool->lock)
worker->current_func = NULL;
worker->current_pwq = NULL;
worker->current_color = INT_MAX;
+
+ /* must be the last step, see the function comment */
pwq_dec_nr_in_flight(pwq, work_data);
}
--
2.43.0
Currently, for both percpu and unbound workqueues, max_active applies
per-cpu, which is a recent change for unbound workqueues. The change for
unbound workqueues was a significant departure from the previous behavior of
per-node application. It made some use cases create undesirable number of
concurrent work items and left no good way of fixing them. To address the
problem, workqueue is implementing a NUMA node segmented global nr_active
mechanism, which will be explained further in the next patch.
As a preparation, this patch introduces struct wq_node_nr_active. It's a
data structured allocated for each workqueue and NUMA node pair and
currently only tracks the workqueue's number of active work items on the
node. This is split out from the next patch to make it easier to understand
and review.
Note that there is an extra wq_node_nr_active allocated for the invalid node
nr_node_ids which is used to track nr_active for pools which don't have NUMA
node associated such as the default fallback system-wide pool.
This doesn't cause any behavior changes visible to userland yet. The next
patch will expand to implement the control mechanism on top.
v3: - Use flexible array for wq->node_nr_active as suggested by Lai.
v2: - wq->max_active now uses WRITE/READ_ONCE() as suggested by Lai.
- Lai pointed out that pwq_tryinc_nr_active() incorrectly dropped
pwq->max_active check. Restored. As the next patch replaces the
max_active enforcement mechanism, this doesn't change the end result.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <[email protected]>
---
kernel/workqueue.c | 139 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 132 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 38d4957b08d1..3c9daa264265 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -280,6 +280,16 @@ struct wq_flusher {
struct wq_device;
+/*
+ * Unlike in a per-cpu workqueue where max_active limits its concurrency level
+ * on each CPU, in an unbound workqueue, max_active applies to the whole system.
+ * As sharing a single nr_active across multiple sockets can be very expensive,
+ * the counting and enforcement is per NUMA node.
+ */
+struct wq_node_nr_active {
+ atomic_t nr; /* per-node nr_active count */
+};
+
/*
* The externally visible workqueue. It relays the issued work items to
* the appropriate worker_pool through its pool_workqueues.
@@ -326,6 +336,7 @@ struct workqueue_struct {
/* hot fields used during command issue, aligned to cacheline */
unsigned int flags ____cacheline_aligned; /* WQ: WQ_* flags */
struct pool_workqueue __percpu __rcu **cpu_pwq; /* I: per-cpu pwqs */
+ struct wq_node_nr_active *node_nr_active[]; /* I: per-node nr_active */
};
static struct kmem_cache *pwq_cache;
@@ -1421,6 +1432,31 @@ work_func_t wq_worker_last_func(struct task_struct *task)
return worker->last_func;
}
+/**
+ * wq_node_nr_active - Determine wq_node_nr_active to use
+ * @wq: workqueue of interest
+ * @node: NUMA node, can be %NUMA_NO_NODE
+ *
+ * Determine wq_node_nr_active to use for @wq on @node. Returns:
+ *
+ * - %NULL for per-cpu workqueues as they don't need to use shared nr_active.
+ *
+ * - node_nr_active[nr_node_ids] if @node is %NUMA_NO_NODE.
+ *
+ * - Otherwise, node_nr_active[@node].
+ */
+static struct wq_node_nr_active *wq_node_nr_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq,
+ int node)
+{
+ if (!(wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND))
+ return NULL;
+
+ if (node == NUMA_NO_NODE)
+ node = nr_node_ids;
+
+ return wq->node_nr_active[node];
+}
+
/**
* get_pwq - get an extra reference on the specified pool_workqueue
* @pwq: pool_workqueue to get
@@ -1502,12 +1538,17 @@ static bool pwq_activate_work(struct pool_workqueue *pwq,
struct work_struct *work)
{
struct worker_pool *pool = pwq->pool;
+ struct wq_node_nr_active *nna;
lockdep_assert_held(&pool->lock);
if (!(*work_data_bits(work) & WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE))
return false;
+ nna = wq_node_nr_active(pwq->wq, pool->node);
+ if (nna)
+ atomic_inc(&nna->nr);
+
pwq->nr_active++;
__pwq_activate_work(pwq, work);
return true;
@@ -1524,14 +1565,18 @@ static bool pwq_tryinc_nr_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
{
struct workqueue_struct *wq = pwq->wq;
struct worker_pool *pool = pwq->pool;
+ struct wq_node_nr_active *nna = wq_node_nr_active(wq, pool->node);
bool obtained;
lockdep_assert_held(&pool->lock);
obtained = pwq->nr_active < READ_ONCE(wq->max_active);
- if (obtained)
+ if (obtained) {
pwq->nr_active++;
+ if (nna)
+ atomic_inc(&nna->nr);
+ }
return obtained;
}
@@ -1568,10 +1613,26 @@ static bool pwq_activate_first_inactive(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
static void pwq_dec_nr_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
{
struct worker_pool *pool = pwq->pool;
+ struct wq_node_nr_active *nna = wq_node_nr_active(pwq->wq, pool->node);
lockdep_assert_held(&pool->lock);
+ /*
+ * @pwq->nr_active should be decremented for both percpu and unbound
+ * workqueues.
+ */
pwq->nr_active--;
+
+ /*
+ * For a percpu workqueue, it's simple. Just need to kick the first
+ * inactive work item on @pwq itself.
+ */
+ if (!nna) {
+ pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ atomic_dec(&nna->nr);
pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq);
}
@@ -4036,12 +4097,62 @@ static void wq_free_lockdep(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
}
#endif
+static void free_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active **nna_ar)
+{
+ int node;
+
+ for_each_node(node) {
+ kfree(nna_ar[node]);
+ nna_ar[node] = NULL;
+ }
+
+ kfree(nna_ar[nr_node_ids]);
+ nna_ar[nr_node_ids] = NULL;
+}
+
+static void init_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active *nna)
+{
+ atomic_set(&nna->nr, 0);
+}
+
+/*
+ * Each node's nr_active counter will be accessed mostly from its own node and
+ * should be allocated in the node.
+ */
+static int alloc_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active **nna_ar)
+{
+ struct wq_node_nr_active *nna;
+ int node;
+
+ for_each_node(node) {
+ nna = kzalloc_node(sizeof(*nna), GFP_KERNEL, node);
+ if (!nna)
+ goto err_free;
+ init_node_nr_active(nna);
+ nna_ar[node] = nna;
+ }
+
+ /* [nr_node_ids] is used as the fallback */
+ nna = kzalloc_node(sizeof(*nna), GFP_KERNEL, NUMA_NO_NODE);
+ if (!nna)
+ goto err_free;
+ init_node_nr_active(nna);
+ nna_ar[nr_node_ids] = nna;
+
+ return 0;
+
+err_free:
+ free_node_nr_active(nna_ar);
+ return -ENOMEM;
+}
+
static void rcu_free_wq(struct rcu_head *rcu)
{
struct workqueue_struct *wq =
container_of(rcu, struct workqueue_struct, rcu);
wq_free_lockdep(wq);
+ free_node_nr_active(wq->node_nr_active);
free_percpu(wq->cpu_pwq);
free_workqueue_attrs(wq->unbound_attrs);
kfree(wq);
@@ -4782,7 +4893,8 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
{
va_list args;
struct workqueue_struct *wq;
- int len;
+ size_t wq_size;
+ int name_len;
/*
* Unbound && max_active == 1 used to imply ordered, which is no longer
@@ -4798,7 +4910,12 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
flags |= WQ_UNBOUND;
/* allocate wq and format name */
- wq = kzalloc(sizeof(*wq), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (flags & WQ_UNBOUND)
+ wq_size = struct_size(wq, node_nr_active, nr_node_ids + 1);
+ else
+ wq_size = sizeof(*wq);
+
+ wq = kzalloc(wq_size, GFP_KERNEL);
if (!wq)
return NULL;
@@ -4809,11 +4926,12 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
}
va_start(args, max_active);
- len = vsnprintf(wq->name, sizeof(wq->name), fmt, args);
+ name_len = vsnprintf(wq->name, sizeof(wq->name), fmt, args);
va_end(args);
- if (len >= WQ_NAME_LEN)
- pr_warn_once("workqueue: name exceeds WQ_NAME_LEN. Truncating to: %s\n", wq->name);
+ if (name_len >= WQ_NAME_LEN)
+ pr_warn_once("workqueue: name exceeds WQ_NAME_LEN. Truncating to: %s\n",
+ wq->name);
max_active = max_active ?: WQ_DFL_ACTIVE;
max_active = wq_clamp_max_active(max_active, flags, wq->name);
@@ -4832,8 +4950,13 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
wq_init_lockdep(wq);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&wq->list);
+ if (flags & WQ_UNBOUND) {
+ if (alloc_node_nr_active(wq->node_nr_active) < 0)
+ goto err_unreg_lockdep;
+ }
+
if (alloc_and_link_pwqs(wq) < 0)
- goto err_unreg_lockdep;
+ goto err_free_node_nr_active;
if (wq_online && init_rescuer(wq) < 0)
goto err_destroy;
@@ -4858,6 +4981,8 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
return wq;
+err_free_node_nr_active:
+ free_node_nr_active(wq->node_nr_active);
err_unreg_lockdep:
wq_unregister_lockdep(wq);
wq_free_lockdep(wq);
--
2.43.0
Hello, Tejun
On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 1:06 AM Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:
> @@ -5121,6 +5374,9 @@ void workqueue_set_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int max_active)
>
> wq->flags &= ~__WQ_ORDERED;
> wq->saved_max_active = max_active;
> + if (wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND)
> + wq->saved_min_active = min(wq->saved_min_active, max_active);
> +
wq_update_node_max_active() must be also called here.
Thanks
Lai
> wq_adjust_max_active(wq);
>
> mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex);
Hello, Tejun
On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 1:06 AM Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:
> @@ -4036,12 +4097,62 @@ static void wq_free_lockdep(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
> }
> #endif
>
> +static void free_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active **nna_ar)
> +{
> + int node;
> +
> + for_each_node(node) {
> + kfree(nna_ar[node]);
> + nna_ar[node] = NULL;
> + }
> +
> + kfree(nna_ar[nr_node_ids]);
> + nna_ar[nr_node_ids] = NULL;
> +}
> +
[....]
> static void rcu_free_wq(struct rcu_head *rcu)
> {
> struct workqueue_struct *wq =
> container_of(rcu, struct workqueue_struct, rcu);
>
> wq_free_lockdep(wq);
> + free_node_nr_active(wq->node_nr_active);
for percpu workqueue, free_node_nr_active() will access out of bound.
> free_percpu(wq->cpu_pwq);
> free_workqueue_attrs(wq->unbound_attrs);
> kfree(wq);
[......]
> @@ -4832,8 +4950,13 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
> wq_init_lockdep(wq);
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&wq->list);
>
> + if (flags & WQ_UNBOUND) {
> + if (alloc_node_nr_active(wq->node_nr_active) < 0)
> + goto err_unreg_lockdep;
> + }
> +
> if (alloc_and_link_pwqs(wq) < 0)
> - goto err_unreg_lockdep;
> + goto err_free_node_nr_active;
>
> if (wq_online && init_rescuer(wq) < 0)
> goto err_destroy;
> @@ -4858,6 +4981,8 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
>
> return wq;
>
> +err_free_node_nr_active:
> + free_node_nr_active(wq->node_nr_active);
for percpu workqueue, free_node_nr_active() will access out of bound.
Thanks
Lai
> err_unreg_lockdep:
> wq_unregister_lockdep(wq);
> wq_free_lockdep(wq);
> --
> 2.43.0
>
Hello, Tejun
On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 1:06 AM Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:
> This patchset includes the following patches:
>
> 0001-workqueue-Move-pwq-max_active-to-wq-max_active.patch
> 0002-workqueue-Factor-out-pwq_is_empty.patch
> 0003-workqueue-Replace-pwq_activate_inactive_work-with-__.patch
> 0004-workqueue-Move-nr_active-handling-into-helpers.patch
> 0005-workqueue-Make-wq_adjust_max_active-round-robin-pwqs.patch
> 0006-workqueue-RCU-protect-wq-dfl_pwq-and-implement-acces.patch
> 0007-workqueue-Move-pwq_dec_nr_in_flight-to-the-end-of-wo.patch
> 0008-workqueue-Introduce-struct-wq_node_nr_active.patch
> 0009-workqueue-Implement-system-wide-nr_active-enforcemen.patch
> 0010-tools-workqueue-wq_dump.py-Add-node_nr-max_active-du.patch
>
I just left a small piece of comments on patch 8 and patch 9.
After they are resolved, for patch 1-9:
Reviewed-by: Lai Jiangshan <[email protected]>
Thanks
Lai
From 91ccc6e7233bb10a9c176aa4cc70d6f432a441a5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 08:11:24 -1000
Currently, for both percpu and unbound workqueues, max_active applies
per-cpu, which is a recent change for unbound workqueues. The change for
unbound workqueues was a significant departure from the previous behavior of
per-node application. It made some use cases create undesirable number of
concurrent work items and left no good way of fixing them. To address the
problem, workqueue is implementing a NUMA node segmented global nr_active
mechanism, which will be explained further in the next patch.
As a preparation, this patch introduces struct wq_node_nr_active. It's a
data structured allocated for each workqueue and NUMA node pair and
currently only tracks the workqueue's number of active work items on the
node. This is split out from the next patch to make it easier to understand
and review.
Note that there is an extra wq_node_nr_active allocated for the invalid node
nr_node_ids which is used to track nr_active for pools which don't have NUMA
node associated such as the default fallback system-wide pool.
This doesn't cause any behavior changes visible to userland yet. The next
patch will expand to implement the control mechanism on top.
v4: - Fixed out-of-bound access when freeing per-cpu workqueues.
v3: - Use flexible array for wq->node_nr_active as suggested by Lai.
v2: - wq->max_active now uses WRITE/READ_ONCE() as suggested by Lai.
- Lai pointed out that pwq_tryinc_nr_active() incorrectly dropped
pwq->max_active check. Restored. As the next patch replaces the
max_active enforcement mechanism, this doesn't change the end result.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Lai Jiangshan <[email protected]>
---
kernel/workqueue.c | 142 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 135 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index b5aba0e5a699..8d465478adb9 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -284,6 +284,16 @@ struct wq_flusher {
struct wq_device;
+/*
+ * Unlike in a per-cpu workqueue where max_active limits its concurrency level
+ * on each CPU, in an unbound workqueue, max_active applies to the whole system.
+ * As sharing a single nr_active across multiple sockets can be very expensive,
+ * the counting and enforcement is per NUMA node.
+ */
+struct wq_node_nr_active {
+ atomic_t nr; /* per-node nr_active count */
+};
+
/*
* The externally visible workqueue. It relays the issued work items to
* the appropriate worker_pool through its pool_workqueues.
@@ -330,6 +340,7 @@ struct workqueue_struct {
/* hot fields used during command issue, aligned to cacheline */
unsigned int flags ____cacheline_aligned; /* WQ: WQ_* flags */
struct pool_workqueue __percpu __rcu **cpu_pwq; /* I: per-cpu pwqs */
+ struct wq_node_nr_active *node_nr_active[]; /* I: per-node nr_active */
};
static struct kmem_cache *pwq_cache;
@@ -1425,6 +1436,31 @@ work_func_t wq_worker_last_func(struct task_struct *task)
return worker->last_func;
}
+/**
+ * wq_node_nr_active - Determine wq_node_nr_active to use
+ * @wq: workqueue of interest
+ * @node: NUMA node, can be %NUMA_NO_NODE
+ *
+ * Determine wq_node_nr_active to use for @wq on @node. Returns:
+ *
+ * - %NULL for per-cpu workqueues as they don't need to use shared nr_active.
+ *
+ * - node_nr_active[nr_node_ids] if @node is %NUMA_NO_NODE.
+ *
+ * - Otherwise, node_nr_active[@node].
+ */
+static struct wq_node_nr_active *wq_node_nr_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq,
+ int node)
+{
+ if (!(wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND))
+ return NULL;
+
+ if (node == NUMA_NO_NODE)
+ node = nr_node_ids;
+
+ return wq->node_nr_active[node];
+}
+
/**
* get_pwq - get an extra reference on the specified pool_workqueue
* @pwq: pool_workqueue to get
@@ -1506,12 +1542,17 @@ static bool pwq_activate_work(struct pool_workqueue *pwq,
struct work_struct *work)
{
struct worker_pool *pool = pwq->pool;
+ struct wq_node_nr_active *nna;
lockdep_assert_held(&pool->lock);
if (!(*work_data_bits(work) & WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE))
return false;
+ nna = wq_node_nr_active(pwq->wq, pool->node);
+ if (nna)
+ atomic_inc(&nna->nr);
+
pwq->nr_active++;
__pwq_activate_work(pwq, work);
return true;
@@ -1528,14 +1569,18 @@ static bool pwq_tryinc_nr_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
{
struct workqueue_struct *wq = pwq->wq;
struct worker_pool *pool = pwq->pool;
+ struct wq_node_nr_active *nna = wq_node_nr_active(wq, pool->node);
bool obtained;
lockdep_assert_held(&pool->lock);
obtained = pwq->nr_active < READ_ONCE(wq->max_active);
- if (obtained)
+ if (obtained) {
pwq->nr_active++;
+ if (nna)
+ atomic_inc(&nna->nr);
+ }
return obtained;
}
@@ -1572,10 +1617,26 @@ static bool pwq_activate_first_inactive(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
static void pwq_dec_nr_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
{
struct worker_pool *pool = pwq->pool;
+ struct wq_node_nr_active *nna = wq_node_nr_active(pwq->wq, pool->node);
lockdep_assert_held(&pool->lock);
+ /*
+ * @pwq->nr_active should be decremented for both percpu and unbound
+ * workqueues.
+ */
pwq->nr_active--;
+
+ /*
+ * For a percpu workqueue, it's simple. Just need to kick the first
+ * inactive work item on @pwq itself.
+ */
+ if (!nna) {
+ pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ atomic_dec(&nna->nr);
pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq);
}
@@ -4039,11 +4100,63 @@ static void wq_free_lockdep(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
}
#endif
+static void free_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active **nna_ar)
+{
+ int node;
+
+ for_each_node(node) {
+ kfree(nna_ar[node]);
+ nna_ar[node] = NULL;
+ }
+
+ kfree(nna_ar[nr_node_ids]);
+ nna_ar[nr_node_ids] = NULL;
+}
+
+static void init_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active *nna)
+{
+ atomic_set(&nna->nr, 0);
+}
+
+/*
+ * Each node's nr_active counter will be accessed mostly from its own node and
+ * should be allocated in the node.
+ */
+static int alloc_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active **nna_ar)
+{
+ struct wq_node_nr_active *nna;
+ int node;
+
+ for_each_node(node) {
+ nna = kzalloc_node(sizeof(*nna), GFP_KERNEL, node);
+ if (!nna)
+ goto err_free;
+ init_node_nr_active(nna);
+ nna_ar[node] = nna;
+ }
+
+ /* [nr_node_ids] is used as the fallback */
+ nna = kzalloc_node(sizeof(*nna), GFP_KERNEL, NUMA_NO_NODE);
+ if (!nna)
+ goto err_free;
+ init_node_nr_active(nna);
+ nna_ar[nr_node_ids] = nna;
+
+ return 0;
+
+err_free:
+ free_node_nr_active(nna_ar);
+ return -ENOMEM;
+}
+
static void rcu_free_wq(struct rcu_head *rcu)
{
struct workqueue_struct *wq =
container_of(rcu, struct workqueue_struct, rcu);
+ if (wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND)
+ free_node_nr_active(wq->node_nr_active);
+
wq_free_lockdep(wq);
free_percpu(wq->cpu_pwq);
free_workqueue_attrs(wq->unbound_attrs);
@@ -4785,7 +4898,8 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
{
va_list args;
struct workqueue_struct *wq;
- int len;
+ size_t wq_size;
+ int name_len;
/*
* Unbound && max_active == 1 used to imply ordered, which is no longer
@@ -4801,7 +4915,12 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
flags |= WQ_UNBOUND;
/* allocate wq and format name */
- wq = kzalloc(sizeof(*wq), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (flags & WQ_UNBOUND)
+ wq_size = struct_size(wq, node_nr_active, nr_node_ids + 1);
+ else
+ wq_size = sizeof(*wq);
+
+ wq = kzalloc(wq_size, GFP_KERNEL);
if (!wq)
return NULL;
@@ -4812,11 +4931,12 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
}
va_start(args, max_active);
- len = vsnprintf(wq->name, sizeof(wq->name), fmt, args);
+ name_len = vsnprintf(wq->name, sizeof(wq->name), fmt, args);
va_end(args);
- if (len >= WQ_NAME_LEN)
- pr_warn_once("workqueue: name exceeds WQ_NAME_LEN. Truncating to: %s\n", wq->name);
+ if (name_len >= WQ_NAME_LEN)
+ pr_warn_once("workqueue: name exceeds WQ_NAME_LEN. Truncating to: %s\n",
+ wq->name);
max_active = max_active ?: WQ_DFL_ACTIVE;
max_active = wq_clamp_max_active(max_active, flags, wq->name);
@@ -4835,8 +4955,13 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
wq_init_lockdep(wq);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&wq->list);
+ if (flags & WQ_UNBOUND) {
+ if (alloc_node_nr_active(wq->node_nr_active) < 0)
+ goto err_unreg_lockdep;
+ }
+
if (alloc_and_link_pwqs(wq) < 0)
- goto err_unreg_lockdep;
+ goto err_free_node_nr_active;
if (wq_online && init_rescuer(wq) < 0)
goto err_destroy;
@@ -4861,6 +4986,9 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
return wq;
+err_free_node_nr_active:
+ if (wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND)
+ free_node_nr_active(wq->node_nr_active);
err_unreg_lockdep:
wq_unregister_lockdep(wq);
wq_free_lockdep(wq);
--
2.43.0
From 5797b1c18919cd9c289ded7954383e499f729ce0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 08:11:25 -1000
A pool_workqueue (pwq) represents the connection between a workqueue and a
worker_pool. One of the roles that a pwq plays is enforcement of the
max_active concurrency limit. Before 636b927eba5b ("workqueue: Make unbound
workqueues to use per-cpu pool_workqueues"), there was one pwq per each CPU
for per-cpu workqueues and per each NUMA node for unbound workqueues, which
was a natural result of per-cpu workqueues being served by per-cpu pools and
unbound by per-NUMA pools.
In terms of max_active enforcement, this was, while not perfect, workable.
For per-cpu workqueues, it was fine. For unbound, it wasn't great in that
NUMA machines would get max_active that's multiplied by the number of nodes
but didn't cause huge problems because NUMA machines are relatively rare and
the node count is usually pretty low.
However, cache layouts are more complex now and sharing a worker pool across
a whole node didn't really work well for unbound workqueues. Thus, a series
of commits culminating on 8639ecebc9b1 ("workqueue: Make unbound workqueues
to use per-cpu pool_workqueues") implemented more flexible affinity
mechanism for unbound workqueues which enables using e.g. last-level-cache
aligned pools. In the process, 636b927eba5b ("workqueue: Make unbound
workqueues to use per-cpu pool_workqueues") made unbound workqueues use
per-cpu pwqs like per-cpu workqueues.
While the change was necessary to enable more flexible affinity scopes, this
came with the side effect of blowing up the effective max_active for unbound
workqueues. Before, the effective max_active for unbound workqueues was
multiplied by the number of nodes. After, by the number of CPUs.
636b927eba5b ("workqueue: Make unbound workqueues to use per-cpu
pool_workqueues") claims that this should generally be okay. It is okay for
users which self-regulates concurrency level which are the vast majority;
however, there are enough use cases which actually depend on max_active to
prevent the level of concurrency from going bonkers including several IO
handling workqueues that can issue a work item for each in-flight IO. With
targeted benchmarks, the misbehavior can easily be exposed as reported in
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/dbu6wiwu3sdhmhikb2w6lns7b27gbobfavhjj57kwi2quafgwl@htjcc5oikcr3.
Unfortunately, there is no way to express what these use cases need using
per-cpu max_active. A CPU may issue most of in-flight IOs, so we don't want
to set max_active too low but as soon as we increase max_active a bit, we
can end up with unreasonable number of in-flight work items when many CPUs
issue IOs at the same time. ie. The acceptable lowest max_active is higher
than the acceptable highest max_active.
Ideally, max_active for an unbound workqueue should be system-wide so that
the users can regulate the total level of concurrency regardless of node and
cache layout. The reasons workqueue hasn't implemented that yet are:
- One max_active enforcement decouples from pool boundaires, chaining
execution after a work item finishes requires inter-pool operations which
would require lock dancing, which is nasty.
- Sharing a single nr_active count across the whole system can be pretty
expensive on NUMA machines.
- Per-pwq enforcement had been more or less okay while we were using
per-node pools.
It looks like we no longer can avoid decoupling max_active enforcement from
pool boundaries. This patch implements system-wide nr_active mechanism with
the following design characteristics:
- To avoid sharing a single counter across multiple nodes, the configured
max_active is split across nodes according to the proportion of each
workqueue's online effective CPUs per node. e.g. A node with twice more
online effective CPUs will get twice higher portion of max_active.
- Workqueue used to be able to process a chain of interdependent work items
which is as long as max_active. We can't do this anymore as max_active is
distributed across the nodes. Instead, a new parameter min_active is
introduced which determines the minimum level of concurrency within a node
regardless of how max_active distribution comes out to be.
It is set to the smaller of max_active and WQ_DFL_MIN_ACTIVE which is 8.
This can lead to higher effective max_weight than configured and also
deadlocks if a workqueue was depending on being able to handle chains of
interdependent work items that are longer than 8.
I believe these should be fine given that the number of CPUs in each NUMA
node is usually higher than 8 and work item chain longer than 8 is pretty
unlikely. However, if these assumptions turn out to be wrong, we'll need
to add an interface to adjust min_active.
- Each unbound wq has an array of struct wq_node_nr_active which tracks
per-node nr_active. When its pwq wants to run a work item, it has to
obtain the matching node's nr_active. If over the node's max_active, the
pwq is queued on wq_node_nr_active->pending_pwqs. As work items finish,
the completion path round-robins the pending pwqs activating the first
inactive work item of each, which involves some pool lock dancing and
kicking other pools. It's not the simplest code but doesn't look too bad.
v4: - wq_adjust_max_active() updated to invoke wq_update_node_max_active().
- wq_adjust_max_active() is now protected by wq->mutex instead of
wq_pool_mutex.
v3: - wq_node_max_active() used to calculate per-node max_active on the fly
based on system-wide CPU online states. Lai pointed out that this can
lead to skewed distributions for workqueues with restricted cpumasks.
Update the max_active distribution to use per-workqueue effective
online CPU counts instead of system-wide and cache the calculation
results in node_nr_active->max.
v2: - wq->min/max_active now uses WRITE/READ_ONCE() as suggested by Lai.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Reported-by: Naohiro Aota <[email protected]>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/dbu6wiwu3sdhmhikb2w6lns7b27gbobfavhjj57kwi2quafgwl@htjcc5oikcr3
Fixes: 636b927eba5b ("workqueue: Make unbound workqueues to use per-cpu pool_workqueues")
Reviewed-by: Lai Jiangshan <[email protected]>
---
include/linux/workqueue.h | 35 +++-
kernel/workqueue.c | 341 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
2 files changed, 341 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/workqueue.h b/include/linux/workqueue.h
index 78047d0d9882..232baea90a1d 100644
--- a/include/linux/workqueue.h
+++ b/include/linux/workqueue.h
@@ -398,6 +398,13 @@ enum wq_consts {
WQ_MAX_ACTIVE = 512, /* I like 512, better ideas? */
WQ_UNBOUND_MAX_ACTIVE = WQ_MAX_ACTIVE,
WQ_DFL_ACTIVE = WQ_MAX_ACTIVE / 2,
+
+ /*
+ * Per-node default cap on min_active. Unless explicitly set, min_active
+ * is set to min(max_active, WQ_DFL_MIN_ACTIVE). For more details, see
+ * workqueue_struct->min_active definition.
+ */
+ WQ_DFL_MIN_ACTIVE = 8,
};
/*
@@ -440,11 +447,33 @@ extern struct workqueue_struct *system_freezable_power_efficient_wq;
* alloc_workqueue - allocate a workqueue
* @fmt: printf format for the name of the workqueue
* @flags: WQ_* flags
- * @max_active: max in-flight work items per CPU, 0 for default
+ * @max_active: max in-flight work items, 0 for default
* remaining args: args for @fmt
*
- * Allocate a workqueue with the specified parameters. For detailed
- * information on WQ_* flags, please refer to
+ * For a per-cpu workqueue, @max_active limits the number of in-flight work
+ * items for each CPU. e.g. @max_active of 1 indicates that each CPU can be
+ * executing at most one work item for the workqueue.
+ *
+ * For unbound workqueues, @max_active limits the number of in-flight work items
+ * for the whole system. e.g. @max_active of 16 indicates that that there can be
+ * at most 16 work items executing for the workqueue in the whole system.
+ *
+ * As sharing the same active counter for an unbound workqueue across multiple
+ * NUMA nodes can be expensive, @max_active is distributed to each NUMA node
+ * according to the proportion of the number of online CPUs and enforced
+ * independently.
+ *
+ * Depending on online CPU distribution, a node may end up with per-node
+ * max_active which is significantly lower than @max_active, which can lead to
+ * deadlocks if the per-node concurrency limit is lower than the maximum number
+ * of interdependent work items for the workqueue.
+ *
+ * To guarantee forward progress regardless of online CPU distribution, the
+ * concurrency limit on every node is guaranteed to be equal to or greater than
+ * min_active which is set to min(@max_active, %WQ_DFL_MIN_ACTIVE). This means
+ * that the sum of per-node max_active's may be larger than @max_active.
+ *
+ * For detailed information on %WQ_* flags, please refer to
* Documentation/core-api/workqueue.rst.
*
* RETURNS:
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 8d465478adb9..903be39bd2d1 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -126,6 +126,9 @@ enum wq_internal_consts {
*
* L: pool->lock protected. Access with pool->lock held.
*
+ * LN: pool->lock and wq_node_nr_active->lock protected for writes. Either for
+ * reads.
+ *
* K: Only modified by worker while holding pool->lock. Can be safely read by
* self, while holding pool->lock or from IRQ context if %current is the
* kworker.
@@ -247,17 +250,18 @@ struct pool_workqueue {
* pwq->inactive_works instead of pool->worklist and marked with
* WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE.
*
- * All work items marked with WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE do not participate
- * in pwq->nr_active and all work items in pwq->inactive_works are
- * marked with WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE. But not all WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE
- * work items are in pwq->inactive_works. Some of them are ready to
- * run in pool->worklist or worker->scheduled. Those work itmes are
- * only struct wq_barrier which is used for flush_work() and should
- * not participate in pwq->nr_active. For non-barrier work item, it
- * is marked with WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE iff it is in pwq->inactive_works.
+ * All work items marked with WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE do not participate in
+ * nr_active and all work items in pwq->inactive_works are marked with
+ * WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE. But not all WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE work items are
+ * in pwq->inactive_works. Some of them are ready to run in
+ * pool->worklist or worker->scheduled. Those work itmes are only struct
+ * wq_barrier which is used for flush_work() and should not participate
+ * in nr_active. For non-barrier work item, it is marked with
+ * WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE iff it is in pwq->inactive_works.
*/
int nr_active; /* L: nr of active works */
struct list_head inactive_works; /* L: inactive works */
+ struct list_head pending_node; /* LN: node on wq_node_nr_active->pending_pwqs */
struct list_head pwqs_node; /* WR: node on wq->pwqs */
struct list_head mayday_node; /* MD: node on wq->maydays */
@@ -289,9 +293,19 @@ struct wq_device;
* on each CPU, in an unbound workqueue, max_active applies to the whole system.
* As sharing a single nr_active across multiple sockets can be very expensive,
* the counting and enforcement is per NUMA node.
+ *
+ * The following struct is used to enforce per-node max_active. When a pwq wants
+ * to start executing a work item, it should increment ->nr using
+ * tryinc_node_nr_active(). If acquisition fails due to ->nr already being over
+ * ->max, the pwq is queued on ->pending_pwqs. As in-flight work items finish
+ * and decrement ->nr, node_activate_pending_pwq() activates the pending pwqs in
+ * round-robin order.
*/
struct wq_node_nr_active {
- atomic_t nr; /* per-node nr_active count */
+ int max; /* per-node max_active */
+ atomic_t nr; /* per-node nr_active */
+ raw_spinlock_t lock; /* nests inside pool locks */
+ struct list_head pending_pwqs; /* LN: pwqs with inactive works */
};
/*
@@ -314,8 +328,12 @@ struct workqueue_struct {
struct worker *rescuer; /* MD: rescue worker */
int nr_drainers; /* WQ: drain in progress */
+
+ /* See alloc_workqueue() function comment for info on min/max_active */
int max_active; /* WO: max active works */
+ int min_active; /* WO: min active works */
int saved_max_active; /* WQ: saved max_active */
+ int saved_min_active; /* WQ: saved min_active */
struct workqueue_attrs *unbound_attrs; /* PW: only for unbound wqs */
struct pool_workqueue __rcu *dfl_pwq; /* PW: only for unbound wqs */
@@ -667,6 +685,19 @@ static struct pool_workqueue *unbound_pwq(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int cpu)
lockdep_is_held(&wq->mutex));
}
+/**
+ * unbound_effective_cpumask - effective cpumask of an unbound workqueue
+ * @wq: workqueue of interest
+ *
+ * @wq->unbound_attrs->cpumask contains the cpumask requested by the user which
+ * is masked with wq_unbound_cpumask to determine the effective cpumask. The
+ * default pwq is always mapped to the pool with the current effective cpumask.
+ */
+static struct cpumask *unbound_effective_cpumask(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
+{
+ return unbound_pwq(wq, -1)->pool->attrs->__pod_cpumask;
+}
+
static unsigned int work_color_to_flags(int color)
{
return color << WORK_STRUCT_COLOR_SHIFT;
@@ -1461,6 +1492,46 @@ static struct wq_node_nr_active *wq_node_nr_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq,
return wq->node_nr_active[node];
}
+/**
+ * wq_update_node_max_active - Update per-node max_actives to use
+ * @wq: workqueue to update
+ * @off_cpu: CPU that's going down, -1 if a CPU is not going down
+ *
+ * Update @wq->node_nr_active[]->max. @wq must be unbound. max_active is
+ * distributed among nodes according to the proportions of numbers of online
+ * cpus. The result is always between @wq->min_active and max_active.
+ */
+static void wq_update_node_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int off_cpu)
+{
+ struct cpumask *effective = unbound_effective_cpumask(wq);
+ int min_active = READ_ONCE(wq->min_active);
+ int max_active = READ_ONCE(wq->max_active);
+ int total_cpus, node;
+
+ lockdep_assert_held(&wq->mutex);
+
+ if (!cpumask_test_cpu(off_cpu, effective))
+ off_cpu = -1;
+
+ total_cpus = cpumask_weight_and(effective, cpu_online_mask);
+ if (off_cpu >= 0)
+ total_cpus--;
+
+ for_each_node(node) {
+ int node_cpus;
+
+ node_cpus = cpumask_weight_and(effective, cpumask_of_node(node));
+ if (off_cpu >= 0 && cpu_to_node(off_cpu) == node)
+ node_cpus--;
+
+ wq_node_nr_active(wq, node)->max =
+ clamp(DIV_ROUND_UP(max_active * node_cpus, total_cpus),
+ min_active, max_active);
+ }
+
+ wq_node_nr_active(wq, NUMA_NO_NODE)->max = min_active;
+}
+
/**
* get_pwq - get an extra reference on the specified pool_workqueue
* @pwq: pool_workqueue to get
@@ -1558,35 +1629,98 @@ static bool pwq_activate_work(struct pool_workqueue *pwq,
return true;
}
+static bool tryinc_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active *nna)
+{
+ int max = READ_ONCE(nna->max);
+
+ while (true) {
+ int old, tmp;
+
+ old = atomic_read(&nna->nr);
+ if (old >= max)
+ return false;
+ tmp = atomic_cmpxchg_relaxed(&nna->nr, old, old + 1);
+ if (tmp == old)
+ return true;
+ }
+}
+
/**
* pwq_tryinc_nr_active - Try to increment nr_active for a pwq
* @pwq: pool_workqueue of interest
+ * @fill: max_active may have increased, try to increase concurrency level
*
* Try to increment nr_active for @pwq. Returns %true if an nr_active count is
* successfully obtained. %false otherwise.
*/
-static bool pwq_tryinc_nr_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
+static bool pwq_tryinc_nr_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq, bool fill)
{
struct workqueue_struct *wq = pwq->wq;
struct worker_pool *pool = pwq->pool;
struct wq_node_nr_active *nna = wq_node_nr_active(wq, pool->node);
- bool obtained;
+ bool obtained = false;
lockdep_assert_held(&pool->lock);
- obtained = pwq->nr_active < READ_ONCE(wq->max_active);
+ if (!nna) {
+ /* per-cpu workqueue, pwq->nr_active is sufficient */
+ obtained = pwq->nr_active < READ_ONCE(wq->max_active);
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * Unbound workqueue uses per-node shared nr_active $nna. If @pwq is
+ * already waiting on $nna, pwq_dec_nr_active() will maintain the
+ * concurrency level. Don't jump the line.
+ *
+ * We need to ignore the pending test after max_active has increased as
+ * pwq_dec_nr_active() can only maintain the concurrency level but not
+ * increase it. This is indicated by @fill.
+ */
+ if (!list_empty(&pwq->pending_node) && likely(!fill))
+ goto out;
+
+ obtained = tryinc_node_nr_active(nna);
+ if (obtained)
+ goto out;
+
+ /*
+ * Lockless acquisition failed. Lock, add ourself to $nna->pending_pwqs
+ * and try again. The smp_mb() is paired with the implied memory barrier
+ * of atomic_dec_return() in pwq_dec_nr_active() to ensure that either
+ * we see the decremented $nna->nr or they see non-empty
+ * $nna->pending_pwqs.
+ */
+ raw_spin_lock(&nna->lock);
+
+ if (list_empty(&pwq->pending_node))
+ list_add_tail(&pwq->pending_node, &nna->pending_pwqs);
+ else if (likely(!fill))
+ goto out_unlock;
+
+ smp_mb();
+
+ obtained = tryinc_node_nr_active(nna);
- if (obtained) {
+ /*
+ * If @fill, @pwq might have already been pending. Being spuriously
+ * pending in cold paths doesn't affect anything. Let's leave it be.
+ */
+ if (obtained && likely(!fill))
+ list_del_init(&pwq->pending_node);
+
+out_unlock:
+ raw_spin_unlock(&nna->lock);
+out:
+ if (obtained)
pwq->nr_active++;
- if (nna)
- atomic_inc(&nna->nr);
- }
return obtained;
}
/**
* pwq_activate_first_inactive - Activate the first inactive work item on a pwq
* @pwq: pool_workqueue of interest
+ * @fill: max_active may have increased, try to increase concurrency level
*
* Activate the first inactive work item of @pwq if available and allowed by
* max_active limit.
@@ -1594,13 +1728,13 @@ static bool pwq_tryinc_nr_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
* Returns %true if an inactive work item has been activated. %false if no
* inactive work item is found or max_active limit is reached.
*/
-static bool pwq_activate_first_inactive(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
+static bool pwq_activate_first_inactive(struct pool_workqueue *pwq, bool fill)
{
struct work_struct *work =
list_first_entry_or_null(&pwq->inactive_works,
struct work_struct, entry);
- if (work && pwq_tryinc_nr_active(pwq)) {
+ if (work && pwq_tryinc_nr_active(pwq, fill)) {
__pwq_activate_work(pwq, work);
return true;
} else {
@@ -1608,11 +1742,93 @@ static bool pwq_activate_first_inactive(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
}
}
+/**
+ * node_activate_pending_pwq - Activate a pending pwq on a wq_node_nr_active
+ * @nna: wq_node_nr_active to activate a pending pwq for
+ * @caller_pool: worker_pool the caller is locking
+ *
+ * Activate a pwq in @nna->pending_pwqs. Called with @caller_pool locked.
+ * @caller_pool may be unlocked and relocked to lock other worker_pools.
+ */
+static void node_activate_pending_pwq(struct wq_node_nr_active *nna,
+ struct worker_pool *caller_pool)
+{
+ struct worker_pool *locked_pool = caller_pool;
+ struct pool_workqueue *pwq;
+ struct work_struct *work;
+
+ lockdep_assert_held(&caller_pool->lock);
+
+ raw_spin_lock(&nna->lock);
+retry:
+ pwq = list_first_entry_or_null(&nna->pending_pwqs,
+ struct pool_workqueue, pending_node);
+ if (!pwq)
+ goto out_unlock;
+
+ /*
+ * If @pwq is for a different pool than @locked_pool, we need to lock
+ * @pwq->pool->lock. Let's trylock first. If unsuccessful, do the unlock
+ * / lock dance. For that, we also need to release @nna->lock as it's
+ * nested inside pool locks.
+ */
+ if (pwq->pool != locked_pool) {
+ raw_spin_unlock(&locked_pool->lock);
+ locked_pool = pwq->pool;
+ if (!raw_spin_trylock(&locked_pool->lock)) {
+ raw_spin_unlock(&nna->lock);
+ raw_spin_lock(&locked_pool->lock);
+ raw_spin_lock(&nna->lock);
+ goto retry;
+ }
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * $pwq may not have any inactive work items due to e.g. cancellations.
+ * Drop it from pending_pwqs and see if there's another one.
+ */
+ work = list_first_entry_or_null(&pwq->inactive_works,
+ struct work_struct, entry);
+ if (!work) {
+ list_del_init(&pwq->pending_node);
+ goto retry;
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * Acquire an nr_active count and activate the inactive work item. If
+ * $pwq still has inactive work items, rotate it to the end of the
+ * pending_pwqs so that we round-robin through them. This means that
+ * inactive work items are not activated in queueing order which is fine
+ * given that there has never been any ordering across different pwqs.
+ */
+ if (likely(tryinc_node_nr_active(nna))) {
+ pwq->nr_active++;
+ __pwq_activate_work(pwq, work);
+
+ if (list_empty(&pwq->inactive_works))
+ list_del_init(&pwq->pending_node);
+ else
+ list_move_tail(&pwq->pending_node, &nna->pending_pwqs);
+
+ /* if activating a foreign pool, make sure it's running */
+ if (pwq->pool != caller_pool)
+ kick_pool(pwq->pool);
+ }
+
+out_unlock:
+ raw_spin_unlock(&nna->lock);
+ if (locked_pool != caller_pool) {
+ raw_spin_unlock(&locked_pool->lock);
+ raw_spin_lock(&caller_pool->lock);
+ }
+}
+
/**
* pwq_dec_nr_active - Retire an active count
* @pwq: pool_workqueue of interest
*
* Decrement @pwq's nr_active and try to activate the first inactive work item.
+ * For unbound workqueues, this function may temporarily drop @pwq->pool->lock.
*/
static void pwq_dec_nr_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
{
@@ -1632,12 +1848,29 @@ static void pwq_dec_nr_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
* inactive work item on @pwq itself.
*/
if (!nna) {
- pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq);
+ pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq, false);
return;
}
- atomic_dec(&nna->nr);
- pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq);
+ /*
+ * If @pwq is for an unbound workqueue, it's more complicated because
+ * multiple pwqs and pools may be sharing the nr_active count. When a
+ * pwq needs to wait for an nr_active count, it puts itself on
+ * $nna->pending_pwqs. The following atomic_dec_return()'s implied
+ * memory barrier is paired with smp_mb() in pwq_tryinc_nr_active() to
+ * guarantee that either we see non-empty pending_pwqs or they see
+ * decremented $nna->nr.
+ *
+ * $nna->max may change as CPUs come online/offline and @pwq->wq's
+ * max_active gets updated. However, it is guaranteed to be equal to or
+ * larger than @pwq->wq->min_active which is above zero unless freezing.
+ * This maintains the forward progress guarantee.
+ */
+ if (atomic_dec_return(&nna->nr) >= READ_ONCE(nna->max))
+ return;
+
+ if (!list_empty(&nna->pending_pwqs))
+ node_activate_pending_pwq(nna, pool);
}
/**
@@ -1965,7 +2198,7 @@ static void __queue_work(int cpu, struct workqueue_struct *wq,
* @work must also queue behind existing inactive work items to maintain
* ordering when max_active changes. See wq_adjust_max_active().
*/
- if (list_empty(&pwq->inactive_works) && pwq_tryinc_nr_active(pwq)) {
+ if (list_empty(&pwq->inactive_works) && pwq_tryinc_nr_active(pwq, false)) {
if (list_empty(&pool->worklist))
pool->watchdog_ts = jiffies;
@@ -3200,7 +3433,7 @@ static void insert_wq_barrier(struct pool_workqueue *pwq,
barr->task = current;
- /* The barrier work item does not participate in pwq->nr_active. */
+ /* The barrier work item does not participate in nr_active. */
work_flags |= WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE;
/*
@@ -4116,6 +4349,8 @@ static void free_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active **nna_ar)
static void init_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active *nna)
{
atomic_set(&nna->nr, 0);
+ raw_spin_lock_init(&nna->lock);
+ INIT_LIST_HEAD(&nna->pending_pwqs);
}
/*
@@ -4355,6 +4590,15 @@ static void pwq_release_workfn(struct kthread_work *work)
mutex_unlock(&wq_pool_mutex);
}
+ if (!list_empty(&pwq->pending_node)) {
+ struct wq_node_nr_active *nna =
+ wq_node_nr_active(pwq->wq, pwq->pool->node);
+
+ raw_spin_lock_irq(&nna->lock);
+ list_del_init(&pwq->pending_node);
+ raw_spin_unlock_irq(&nna->lock);
+ }
+
call_rcu(&pwq->rcu, rcu_free_pwq);
/*
@@ -4380,6 +4624,7 @@ static void init_pwq(struct pool_workqueue *pwq, struct workqueue_struct *wq,
pwq->flush_color = -1;
pwq->refcnt = 1;
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pwq->inactive_works);
+ INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pwq->pending_node);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pwq->pwqs_node);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pwq->mayday_node);
kthread_init_work(&pwq->release_work, pwq_release_workfn);
@@ -4587,6 +4832,9 @@ static void apply_wqattrs_commit(struct apply_wqattrs_ctx *ctx)
ctx->pwq_tbl[cpu]);
ctx->dfl_pwq = install_unbound_pwq(ctx->wq, -1, ctx->dfl_pwq);
+ /* update node_nr_active->max */
+ wq_update_node_max_active(ctx->wq, -1);
+
mutex_unlock(&ctx->wq->mutex);
}
@@ -4850,24 +5098,35 @@ static int init_rescuer(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
static void wq_adjust_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
{
bool activated;
+ int new_max, new_min;
lockdep_assert_held(&wq->mutex);
if ((wq->flags & WQ_FREEZABLE) && workqueue_freezing) {
- WRITE_ONCE(wq->max_active, 0);
- return;
+ new_max = 0;
+ new_min = 0;
+ } else {
+ new_max = wq->saved_max_active;
+ new_min = wq->saved_min_active;
}
- if (wq->max_active == wq->saved_max_active)
+ if (wq->max_active == new_max && wq->min_active == new_min)
return;
/*
- * Update @wq->max_active and then kick inactive work items if more
+ * Update @wq->max/min_active and then kick inactive work items if more
* active work items are allowed. This doesn't break work item ordering
* because new work items are always queued behind existing inactive
* work items if there are any.
*/
- WRITE_ONCE(wq->max_active, wq->saved_max_active);
+ WRITE_ONCE(wq->max_active, new_max);
+ WRITE_ONCE(wq->min_active, new_min);
+
+ if (wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND)
+ wq_update_node_max_active(wq, -1);
+
+ if (new_max == 0)
+ return;
/*
* Round-robin through pwq's activating the first inactive work item
@@ -4882,7 +5141,7 @@ static void wq_adjust_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
/* can be called during early boot w/ irq disabled */
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pwq->pool->lock, flags);
- if (pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq)) {
+ if (pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq, true)) {
activated = true;
kick_pool(pwq->pool);
}
@@ -4944,7 +5203,9 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
/* init wq */
wq->flags = flags;
wq->max_active = max_active;
- wq->saved_max_active = max_active;
+ wq->min_active = min(max_active, WQ_DFL_MIN_ACTIVE);
+ wq->saved_max_active = wq->max_active;
+ wq->saved_min_active = wq->min_active;
mutex_init(&wq->mutex);
atomic_set(&wq->nr_pwqs_to_flush, 0);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&wq->pwqs);
@@ -5110,7 +5371,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(destroy_workqueue);
* @wq: target workqueue
* @max_active: new max_active value.
*
- * Set max_active of @wq to @max_active.
+ * Set max_active of @wq to @max_active. See the alloc_workqueue() function
+ * comment.
*
* CONTEXT:
* Don't call from IRQ context.
@@ -5127,6 +5389,9 @@ void workqueue_set_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int max_active)
wq->flags &= ~__WQ_ORDERED;
wq->saved_max_active = max_active;
+ if (wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND)
+ wq->saved_min_active = min(wq->saved_min_active, max_active);
+
wq_adjust_max_active(wq);
mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex);
@@ -5808,6 +6073,10 @@ int workqueue_online_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
for_each_cpu(tcpu, pt->pod_cpus[pt->cpu_pod[cpu]])
wq_update_pod(wq, tcpu, cpu, true);
+
+ mutex_lock(&wq->mutex);
+ wq_update_node_max_active(wq, -1);
+ mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex);
}
}
@@ -5836,6 +6105,10 @@ int workqueue_offline_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
for_each_cpu(tcpu, pt->pod_cpus[pt->cpu_pod[cpu]])
wq_update_pod(wq, tcpu, cpu, false);
+
+ mutex_lock(&wq->mutex);
+ wq_update_node_max_active(wq, cpu);
+ mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex);
}
}
mutex_unlock(&wq_pool_mutex);
@@ -7127,8 +7400,12 @@ void __init workqueue_init_topology(void)
* combinations to apply per-pod sharing.
*/
list_for_each_entry(wq, &workqueues, list) {
- for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
+ for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
wq_update_pod(wq, cpu, cpu, true);
+ if (wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND) {
+ mutex_lock(&wq->mutex);
+ wq_update_node_max_active(wq, -1);
+ mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex);
}
}
--
2.43.0
On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 12:07:33AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> Hello, Tejun
>
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 1:06 AM Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > This patchset includes the following patches:
> >
> > 0001-workqueue-Move-pwq-max_active-to-wq-max_active.patch
> > 0002-workqueue-Factor-out-pwq_is_empty.patch
> > 0003-workqueue-Replace-pwq_activate_inactive_work-with-__.patch
> > 0004-workqueue-Move-nr_active-handling-into-helpers.patch
> > 0005-workqueue-Make-wq_adjust_max_active-round-robin-pwqs.patch
> > 0006-workqueue-RCU-protect-wq-dfl_pwq-and-implement-acces.patch
> > 0007-workqueue-Move-pwq_dec_nr_in_flight-to-the-end-of-wo.patch
> > 0008-workqueue-Introduce-struct-wq_node_nr_active.patch
> > 0009-workqueue-Implement-system-wide-nr_active-enforcemen.patch
> > 0010-tools-workqueue-wq_dump.py-Add-node_nr-max_active-du.patch
> >
>
> I just left a small piece of comments on patch 8 and patch 9.
> After they are resolved, for patch 1-9:
>
> Reviewed-by: Lai Jiangshan <[email protected]>
Updated 8 and 9 and applied the series to wq/for-6.9. If there are further
issues, let's address with followup patches.
Thanks a lot for all the reviews. Hopefully, this should address the
max_active issue for the long term.
--
tejun
Hi Tejun,
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 08:14:09AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >From 91ccc6e7233bb10a9c176aa4cc70d6f432a441a5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 08:11:24 -1000
>
> Currently, for both percpu and unbound workqueues, max_active applies
> per-cpu, which is a recent change for unbound workqueues. The change for
> unbound workqueues was a significant departure from the previous behavior of
> per-node application. It made some use cases create undesirable number of
> concurrent work items and left no good way of fixing them. To address the
> problem, workqueue is implementing a NUMA node segmented global nr_active
> mechanism, which will be explained further in the next patch.
>
> As a preparation, this patch introduces struct wq_node_nr_active. It's a
> data structured allocated for each workqueue and NUMA node pair and
> currently only tracks the workqueue's number of active work items on the
> node. This is split out from the next patch to make it easier to understand
> and review.
>
> Note that there is an extra wq_node_nr_active allocated for the invalid node
> nr_node_ids which is used to track nr_active for pools which don't have NUMA
> node associated such as the default fallback system-wide pool.
>
> This doesn't cause any behavior changes visible to userland yet. The next
> patch will expand to implement the control mechanism on top.
>
> v4: - Fixed out-of-bound access when freeing per-cpu workqueues.
>
> v3: - Use flexible array for wq->node_nr_active as suggested by Lai.
>
> v2: - wq->max_active now uses WRITE/READ_ONCE() as suggested by Lai.
>
> - Lai pointed out that pwq_tryinc_nr_active() incorrectly dropped
> pwq->max_active check. Restored. As the next patch replaces the
> max_active enforcement mechanism, this doesn't change the end result.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Lai Jiangshan <[email protected]>
> ---
> kernel/workqueue.c | 142 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 135 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
> index b5aba0e5a699..8d465478adb9 100644
> --- a/kernel/workqueue.c
> +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
> @@ -284,6 +284,16 @@ struct wq_flusher {
>
> struct wq_device;
>
> +/*
> + * Unlike in a per-cpu workqueue where max_active limits its concurrency level
> + * on each CPU, in an unbound workqueue, max_active applies to the whole system.
> + * As sharing a single nr_active across multiple sockets can be very expensive,
> + * the counting and enforcement is per NUMA node.
> + */
> +struct wq_node_nr_active {
> + atomic_t nr; /* per-node nr_active count */
> +};
> +
> /*
> * The externally visible workqueue. It relays the issued work items to
> * the appropriate worker_pool through its pool_workqueues.
> @@ -330,6 +340,7 @@ struct workqueue_struct {
> /* hot fields used during command issue, aligned to cacheline */
> unsigned int flags ____cacheline_aligned; /* WQ: WQ_* flags */
> struct pool_workqueue __percpu __rcu **cpu_pwq; /* I: per-cpu pwqs */
> + struct wq_node_nr_active *node_nr_active[]; /* I: per-node nr_active */
> };
>
> static struct kmem_cache *pwq_cache;
> @@ -1425,6 +1436,31 @@ work_func_t wq_worker_last_func(struct task_struct *task)
> return worker->last_func;
> }
>
> +/**
> + * wq_node_nr_active - Determine wq_node_nr_active to use
> + * @wq: workqueue of interest
> + * @node: NUMA node, can be %NUMA_NO_NODE
> + *
> + * Determine wq_node_nr_active to use for @wq on @node. Returns:
> + *
> + * - %NULL for per-cpu workqueues as they don't need to use shared nr_active.
> + *
> + * - node_nr_active[nr_node_ids] if @node is %NUMA_NO_NODE.
> + *
> + * - Otherwise, node_nr_active[@node].
> + */
> +static struct wq_node_nr_active *wq_node_nr_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq,
> + int node)
> +{
> + if (!(wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND))
> + return NULL;
> +
> + if (node == NUMA_NO_NODE)
> + node = nr_node_ids;
> +
> + return wq->node_nr_active[node];
> +}
> +
> /**
> * get_pwq - get an extra reference on the specified pool_workqueue
> * @pwq: pool_workqueue to get
> @@ -1506,12 +1542,17 @@ static bool pwq_activate_work(struct pool_workqueue *pwq,
> struct work_struct *work)
> {
> struct worker_pool *pool = pwq->pool;
> + struct wq_node_nr_active *nna;
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&pool->lock);
>
> if (!(*work_data_bits(work) & WORK_STRUCT_INACTIVE))
> return false;
>
> + nna = wq_node_nr_active(pwq->wq, pool->node);
> + if (nna)
> + atomic_inc(&nna->nr);
> +
> pwq->nr_active++;
> __pwq_activate_work(pwq, work);
> return true;
> @@ -1528,14 +1569,18 @@ static bool pwq_tryinc_nr_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
> {
> struct workqueue_struct *wq = pwq->wq;
> struct worker_pool *pool = pwq->pool;
> + struct wq_node_nr_active *nna = wq_node_nr_active(wq, pool->node);
> bool obtained;
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&pool->lock);
>
> obtained = pwq->nr_active < READ_ONCE(wq->max_active);
>
> - if (obtained)
> + if (obtained) {
> pwq->nr_active++;
> + if (nna)
> + atomic_inc(&nna->nr);
> + }
> return obtained;
> }
>
> @@ -1572,10 +1617,26 @@ static bool pwq_activate_first_inactive(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
> static void pwq_dec_nr_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
> {
> struct worker_pool *pool = pwq->pool;
> + struct wq_node_nr_active *nna = wq_node_nr_active(pwq->wq, pool->node);
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&pool->lock);
>
> + /*
> + * @pwq->nr_active should be decremented for both percpu and unbound
> + * workqueues.
> + */
> pwq->nr_active--;
> +
> + /*
> + * For a percpu workqueue, it's simple. Just need to kick the first
> + * inactive work item on @pwq itself.
> + */
> + if (!nna) {
> + pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + atomic_dec(&nna->nr);
> pwq_activate_first_inactive(pwq);
> }
>
> @@ -4039,11 +4100,63 @@ static void wq_free_lockdep(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
> }
> #endif
>
> +static void free_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active **nna_ar)
> +{
> + int node;
> +
> + for_each_node(node) {
> + kfree(nna_ar[node]);
> + nna_ar[node] = NULL;
> + }
> +
> + kfree(nna_ar[nr_node_ids]);
> + nna_ar[nr_node_ids] = NULL;
> +}
> +
> +static void init_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active *nna)
> +{
> + atomic_set(&nna->nr, 0);
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Each node's nr_active counter will be accessed mostly from its own node and
> + * should be allocated in the node.
> + */
> +static int alloc_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active **nna_ar)
> +{
> + struct wq_node_nr_active *nna;
> + int node;
> +
> + for_each_node(node) {
> + nna = kzalloc_node(sizeof(*nna), GFP_KERNEL, node);
> + if (!nna)
> + goto err_free;
> + init_node_nr_active(nna);
> + nna_ar[node] = nna;
> + }
> +
> + /* [nr_node_ids] is used as the fallback */
> + nna = kzalloc_node(sizeof(*nna), GFP_KERNEL, NUMA_NO_NODE);
> + if (!nna)
> + goto err_free;
> + init_node_nr_active(nna);
> + nna_ar[nr_node_ids] = nna;
> +
> + return 0;
> +
> +err_free:
> + free_node_nr_active(nna_ar);
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +}
> +
> static void rcu_free_wq(struct rcu_head *rcu)
> {
> struct workqueue_struct *wq =
> container_of(rcu, struct workqueue_struct, rcu);
>
> + if (wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND)
> + free_node_nr_active(wq->node_nr_active);
> +
> wq_free_lockdep(wq);
> free_percpu(wq->cpu_pwq);
> free_workqueue_attrs(wq->unbound_attrs);
> @@ -4785,7 +4898,8 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
> {
> va_list args;
> struct workqueue_struct *wq;
> - int len;
> + size_t wq_size;
> + int name_len;
>
> /*
> * Unbound && max_active == 1 used to imply ordered, which is no longer
> @@ -4801,7 +4915,12 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
> flags |= WQ_UNBOUND;
>
> /* allocate wq and format name */
> - wq = kzalloc(sizeof(*wq), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (flags & WQ_UNBOUND)
> + wq_size = struct_size(wq, node_nr_active, nr_node_ids + 1);
> + else
> + wq_size = sizeof(*wq);
> +
> + wq = kzalloc(wq_size, GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!wq)
> return NULL;
>
> @@ -4812,11 +4931,12 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
> }
>
> va_start(args, max_active);
> - len = vsnprintf(wq->name, sizeof(wq->name), fmt, args);
> + name_len = vsnprintf(wq->name, sizeof(wq->name), fmt, args);
> va_end(args);
>
> - if (len >= WQ_NAME_LEN)
> - pr_warn_once("workqueue: name exceeds WQ_NAME_LEN. Truncating to: %s\n", wq->name);
> + if (name_len >= WQ_NAME_LEN)
> + pr_warn_once("workqueue: name exceeds WQ_NAME_LEN. Truncating to: %s\n",
> + wq->name);
>
> max_active = max_active ?: WQ_DFL_ACTIVE;
> max_active = wq_clamp_max_active(max_active, flags, wq->name);
> @@ -4835,8 +4955,13 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
> wq_init_lockdep(wq);
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&wq->list);
>
> + if (flags & WQ_UNBOUND) {
> + if (alloc_node_nr_active(wq->node_nr_active) < 0)
> + goto err_unreg_lockdep;
> + }
> +
> if (alloc_and_link_pwqs(wq) < 0)
> - goto err_unreg_lockdep;
> + goto err_free_node_nr_active;
>
> if (wq_online && init_rescuer(wq) < 0)
> goto err_destroy;
> @@ -4861,6 +4986,9 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
>
> return wq;
>
> +err_free_node_nr_active:
> + if (wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND)
> + free_node_nr_active(wq->node_nr_active);
> err_unreg_lockdep:
> wq_unregister_lockdep(wq);
> wq_free_lockdep(wq);
> --
> 2.43.0
>
I just bisected a crash that I see when booting several different architectures
in QEMU in -next to this change as commit 5797b1c18919 ("workqueue: Implement
system-wide nr_active enforcement for unbound workqueues"). For example, with
arm64 virtconfig (I also see it with ARCH=arm multi_v7_defconfig and
ARCH=riscv defconfig):
$ make -skj"$(nproc)" ARCH=arm64 CROSS_COMPILE=aarch64-linux- virtconfig Image.gz
$ qemu-system-aarch64 \
-display none \
-nodefaults \
-cpu max,pauth-impdef=true \
-machine virt,gic-version=max,virtualization=true \
-append 'console=ttyAMA0 earlycon' \
-kernel arch/arm64/boot/Image.gz \
-initrd rootfs.cpio \
-m 512m \
-serial mon:stdio
[ 0.000000] Booting Linux on physical CPU 0x0000000000 [0x000f0510]
[ 0.000000] Linux version 6.7.0-09946-g5797b1c18919 ([email protected]) (aarch64-linux-gcc (GCC) 13.2.0, GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.41) #1 SMP PREEMPT Tue Jan 30 10:10:57 MST 2024
..
[ 0.000000] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address ffff000021c0b380
[ 0.000000] Mem abort info:
[ 0.000000] ESR = 0x0000000096000006
[ 0.000000] EC = 0x25: DABT (current EL), IL = 32 bits
[ 0.000000] SET = 0, FnV = 0
[ 0.000000] EA = 0, S1PTW = 0
[ 0.000000] FSC = 0x06: level 2 translation fault
[ 0.000000] Data abort info:
[ 0.000000] ISV = 0, ISS = 0x00000006, ISS2 = 0x00000000
[ 0.000000] CM = 0, WnR = 0, TnD = 0, TagAccess = 0
[ 0.000000] GCS = 0, Overlay = 0, DirtyBit = 0, Xs = 0
[ 0.000000] swapper pgtable: 4k pages, 48-bit VAs, pgdp=00000000413b1000
[ 0.000000] [ffff000021c0b380] pgd=180000005fff7003, p4d=180000005fff7003, pud=180000005fff6003, pmd=0000000000000000
[ 0.000000] Internal error: Oops: 0000000096000006 [#1] PREEMPT SMP
[ 0.000000] Modules linked in:
[ 0.000000] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 6.7.0-09946-g5797b1c18919 #1
[ 0.000000] Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT)
[ 0.000000] pstate: 600000c9 (nZCv daIF -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--)
[ 0.000000] pc : wq_update_node_max_active+0x48/0x1d8
[ 0.000000] lr : apply_wqattrs_commit+0x160/0x180
[ 0.000000] sp : ffffda8d476b3be0
[ 0.000000] x29: ffffda8d476b3be0 x28: ffff000001c0d600 x27: 0000000000000000
[ 0.000000] x26: ffff000001c0d6c0 x25: 0000000000000001 x24: 0000000000000200
[ 0.000000] x23: 00000000ffffffff x22: ffffda8d476b9c40 x21: 0000000000000008
[ 0.000000] x20: ffffda8d476b9a40 x19: ffff000001c0b360 x18: ffff00001feebed0
[ 0.000000] x17: 0000000000c65c70 x16: ffff00001feebb28 x15: fffffc0000070488
[ 0.000000] x14: 0000000000000000 x13: 0000000000000000 x12: ffff00001feebb28
[ 0.000000] x11: 0000000000000001 x10: ffff000001c0b388 x9 : 0000000000000000
[ 0.000000] x8 : 0000000000000000 x7 : 0000000000000000 x6 : ffff000001c0d600
[ 0.000000] x5 : ffff000001c0d600 x4 : ffff000001c0e880 x3 : ffff000001c0d600
[ 0.000000] x2 : ffff000001c0b388 x1 : ffffda8d476b9000 x0 : 0000000003ffffff
[ 0.000000] Call trace:
[ 0.000000] wq_update_node_max_active+0x48/0x1d8
[ 0.000000] apply_wqattrs_commit+0x160/0x180
[ 0.000000] apply_workqueue_attrs_locked+0x50/0x84
[ 0.000000] alloc_workqueue+0x588/0x6c8
[ 0.000000] workqueue_init_early+0x480/0x554
[ 0.000000] start_kernel+0x240/0x5e8
[ 0.000000] __primary_switched+0xb8/0xc0
[ 0.000000] Code: f9418033 d000a081 9100a262 f90037e2 (f8607840)
[ 0.000000] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
[ 0.000000] Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
[ 0.000000] ---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task! ]---
If there is any more information I can provide or patches I can test, I
am more than happy to do so.
Cheers,
Nathan
# bad: [41d66f96d0f15a0a2ad6fa2208f6bac1a66cbd52] Add linux-next specific files for 20240130
# good: [41bccc98fb7931d63d03f326a746ac4d429c1dd3] Linux 6.8-rc2
git bisect start '41d66f96d0f15a0a2ad6fa2208f6bac1a66cbd52' '41bccc98fb7931d63d03f326a746ac4d429c1dd3'
# good: [f3f89885646036e16b325aea597fc9f375f1a56a] Merge branch 'main' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net-next.git
git bisect good f3f89885646036e16b325aea597fc9f375f1a56a
# good: [8042d32dd6c3730b0b4c8c9c811e204ed9f5f829] Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git
git bisect good 8042d32dd6c3730b0b4c8c9c811e204ed9f5f829
# bad: [f0edba72fe5ae932877f49796aaef8adf1a2eb8c] Merge branch 'togreg' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jic23/iio.git
git bisect bad f0edba72fe5ae932877f49796aaef8adf1a2eb8c
# bad: [549632942a27cc3987473f8a8629200bc2ab0734] Merge branch 'next' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/westeri/thunderbolt.git
git bisect bad 549632942a27cc3987473f8a8629200bc2ab0734
# good: [9eb48e8d465d67362dac65963979e65cb2ad7634] Merge branch 'for-next' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dennis/percpu.git
git bisect good 9eb48e8d465d67362dac65963979e65cb2ad7634
# good: [bc83a87759cabbf6f3366568e44bda088b315204] dt-bindings: usb: dwc3: Add snps,host-vbus-glitches-quirk avoid vbus glitch
git bisect good bc83a87759cabbf6f3366568e44bda088b315204
# bad: [2c0ea2f8eb6140767fae8d01a30ce45dcf4ead85] Merge branch 'for-next' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/wq.git
git bisect bad 2c0ea2f8eb6140767fae8d01a30ce45dcf4ead85
# good: [a045a272d887575da17ad86d6573e82871b50c27] workqueue: Move pwq->max_active to wq->max_active
git bisect good a045a272d887575da17ad86d6573e82871b50c27
# good: [9f66cff212bb3c1cd25996aaa0dfd0c9e9d8baab] workqueue: RCU protect wq->dfl_pwq and implement accessors for it
git bisect good 9f66cff212bb3c1cd25996aaa0dfd0c9e9d8baab
# good: [91ccc6e7233bb10a9c176aa4cc70d6f432a441a5] workqueue: Introduce struct wq_node_nr_active
git bisect good 91ccc6e7233bb10a9c176aa4cc70d6f432a441a5
# bad: [07daa99b7fd7adfffa22180184e39ec124e73013] tools/workqueue/wq_dump.py: Add node_nr/max_active dump
git bisect bad 07daa99b7fd7adfffa22180184e39ec124e73013
# bad: [5797b1c18919cd9c289ded7954383e499f729ce0] workqueue: Implement system-wide nr_active enforcement for unbound workqueues
git bisect bad 5797b1c18919cd9c289ded7954383e499f729ce0
# first bad commit: [5797b1c18919cd9c289ded7954383e499f729ce0] workqueue: Implement system-wide nr_active enforcement for unbound workqueues
Dear All,
On 29.01.2024 19:14, Tejun Heo wrote:
> From: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 08:11:25 -1000
>
> A pool_workqueue (pwq) represents the connection between a workqueue and a
> worker_pool. One of the roles that a pwq plays is enforcement of the
> max_active concurrency limit. Before 636b927eba5b ("workqueue: Make unbound
> workqueues to use per-cpu pool_workqueues"), there was one pwq per each CPU
> for per-cpu workqueues and per each NUMA node for unbound workqueues, which
> was a natural result of per-cpu workqueues being served by per-cpu pools and
> unbound by per-NUMA pools.
>
> In terms of max_active enforcement, this was, while not perfect, workable.
> For per-cpu workqueues, it was fine. For unbound, it wasn't great in that
> NUMA machines would get max_active that's multiplied by the number of nodes
> but didn't cause huge problems because NUMA machines are relatively rare and
> the node count is usually pretty low.
>
> However, cache layouts are more complex now and sharing a worker pool across
> a whole node didn't really work well for unbound workqueues. Thus, a series
> of commits culminating on 8639ecebc9b1 ("workqueue: Make unbound workqueues
> to use per-cpu pool_workqueues") implemented more flexible affinity
> mechanism for unbound workqueues which enables using e.g. last-level-cache
> aligned pools. In the process, 636b927eba5b ("workqueue: Make unbound
> workqueues to use per-cpu pool_workqueues") made unbound workqueues use
> per-cpu pwqs like per-cpu workqueues.
>
> While the change was necessary to enable more flexible affinity scopes, this
> came with the side effect of blowing up the effective max_active for unbound
> workqueues. Before, the effective max_active for unbound workqueues was
> multiplied by the number of nodes. After, by the number of CPUs.
>
> 636b927eba5b ("workqueue: Make unbound workqueues to use per-cpu
> pool_workqueues") claims that this should generally be okay. It is okay for
> users which self-regulates concurrency level which are the vast majority;
> however, there are enough use cases which actually depend on max_active to
> prevent the level of concurrency from going bonkers including several IO
> handling workqueues that can issue a work item for each in-flight IO. With
> targeted benchmarks, the misbehavior can easily be exposed as reported in
> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/dbu6wiwu3sdhmhikb2w6lns7b27gbobfavhjj57kwi2quafgwl@htjcc5oikcr3.
>
> Unfortunately, there is no way to express what these use cases need using
> per-cpu max_active. A CPU may issue most of in-flight IOs, so we don't want
> to set max_active too low but as soon as we increase max_active a bit, we
> can end up with unreasonable number of in-flight work items when many CPUs
> issue IOs at the same time. ie. The acceptable lowest max_active is higher
> than the acceptable highest max_active.
>
> Ideally, max_active for an unbound workqueue should be system-wide so that
> the users can regulate the total level of concurrency regardless of node and
> cache layout. The reasons workqueue hasn't implemented that yet are:
>
> - One max_active enforcement decouples from pool boundaires, chaining
> execution after a work item finishes requires inter-pool operations which
> would require lock dancing, which is nasty.
>
> - Sharing a single nr_active count across the whole system can be pretty
> expensive on NUMA machines.
>
> - Per-pwq enforcement had been more or less okay while we were using
> per-node pools.
>
> It looks like we no longer can avoid decoupling max_active enforcement from
> pool boundaries. This patch implements system-wide nr_active mechanism with
> the following design characteristics:
>
> - To avoid sharing a single counter across multiple nodes, the configured
> max_active is split across nodes according to the proportion of each
> workqueue's online effective CPUs per node. e.g. A node with twice more
> online effective CPUs will get twice higher portion of max_active.
>
> - Workqueue used to be able to process a chain of interdependent work items
> which is as long as max_active. We can't do this anymore as max_active is
> distributed across the nodes. Instead, a new parameter min_active is
> introduced which determines the minimum level of concurrency within a node
> regardless of how max_active distribution comes out to be.
>
> It is set to the smaller of max_active and WQ_DFL_MIN_ACTIVE which is 8.
> This can lead to higher effective max_weight than configured and also
> deadlocks if a workqueue was depending on being able to handle chains of
> interdependent work items that are longer than 8.
>
> I believe these should be fine given that the number of CPUs in each NUMA
> node is usually higher than 8 and work item chain longer than 8 is pretty
> unlikely. However, if these assumptions turn out to be wrong, we'll need
> to add an interface to adjust min_active.
>
> - Each unbound wq has an array of struct wq_node_nr_active which tracks
> per-node nr_active. When its pwq wants to run a work item, it has to
> obtain the matching node's nr_active. If over the node's max_active, the
> pwq is queued on wq_node_nr_active->pending_pwqs. As work items finish,
> the completion path round-robins the pending pwqs activating the first
> inactive work item of each, which involves some pool lock dancing and
> kicking other pools. It's not the simplest code but doesn't look too bad.
>
> v4: - wq_adjust_max_active() updated to invoke wq_update_node_max_active().
>
> - wq_adjust_max_active() is now protected by wq->mutex instead of
> wq_pool_mutex.
>
> v3: - wq_node_max_active() used to calculate per-node max_active on the fly
> based on system-wide CPU online states. Lai pointed out that this can
> lead to skewed distributions for workqueues with restricted cpumasks.
> Update the max_active distribution to use per-workqueue effective
> online CPU counts instead of system-wide and cache the calculation
> results in node_nr_active->max.
>
> v2: - wq->min/max_active now uses WRITE/READ_ONCE() as suggested by Lai.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
> Reported-by: Naohiro Aota <[email protected]>
> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/dbu6wiwu3sdhmhikb2w6lns7b27gbobfavhjj57kwi2quafgwl@htjcc5oikcr3
> Fixes: 636b927eba5b ("workqueue: Make unbound workqueues to use per-cpu pool_workqueues")
> Reviewed-by: Lai Jiangshan <[email protected]>
This patch landed in linux-next from 20240130 as commit 5797b1c18919
("workqueue: Implement system-wide nr_active enforcement for unbound
workqueues"). Unfortunately it causes the following regression on ARM64
RK3568 SoC based Odroid-M1 board:
Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address ffff0002100296e0
Mem abort info:
ESR = 0x0000000096000005
EC = 0x25: DABT (current EL), IL = 32 bits
SET = 0, FnV = 0
EA = 0, S1PTW = 0
FSC = 0x05: level 1 translation fault
Data abort info:
ISV = 0, ISS = 0x00000005, ISS2 = 0x00000000
CM = 0, WnR = 0, TnD = 0, TagAccess = 0
GCS = 0, Overlay = 0, DirtyBit = 0, Xs = 0
swapper pgtable: 4k pages, 48-bit VAs, pgdp=000000000255a000
[ffff0002100296e0] pgd=18000001ffff7003, p4d=18000001ffff7003,
pud=0000000000000000
Internal error: Oops: 0000000096000005 [#1] PREEMPT SMP
Modules linked in:
CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 6.8.0-rc2-next-20240130+ #14392
Hardware name: Hardkernel ODROID-M1 (DT)
pstate: 600000c9 (nZCv daIF -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--)
pc : wq_update_node_max_active+0x50/0x1fc
lr : wq_update_node_max_active+0x1f0/0x1fc
..
Call trace:
wq_update_node_max_active+0x50/0x1fc
apply_wqattrs_commit+0xf0/0x114
apply_workqueue_attrs_locked+0x58/0xa0
alloc_workqueue+0x5ac/0x774
workqueue_init_early+0x460/0x540
start_kernel+0x258/0x684
__primary_switched+0xb8/0xc0
Code: 9100a273 35000d01 53067f00 d0016dc1 (f8607a60)
---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task! ]---
This wasn't trivial to bisect, because next-20240130 suffers from other
regressions:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
but reverting this change and the ones mentioned in that thread fixes
all the issues observed on top of today's linux-next release. Let me
know if there is anything I can do to help fixing this issue.
> ---
> include/linux/workqueue.h | 35 +++-
> kernel/workqueue.c | 341 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> 2 files changed, 341 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
> ...
Best regards
--
Marek Szyprowski, PhD
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
Hello,
Thanks for the report. Can you please test whether the following patch fixes
the problem?
----- 8< -----
From: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Subject: workqueue: Fix crash due to premature NUMA topology access on some archs
System workqueues are allocated early during boot from
workqueue_init_early(). While allocating unbound workqueues,
wq_update_node_max_active() is invoked from apply_workqueue_attrs() and
accesses NUMA topology information - cpumask_of_node() and cpu_to_node().
At this point, topology information is not initialized yet and on arm and
some other archs, it leads to an oops like the following:
Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address ffff0002100296e0
Mem abort info:
ESR = 0x0000000096000005
EC = 0x25: DABT (current EL), IL = 32 bits
SET = 0, FnV = 0
EA = 0, S1PTW = 0
FSC = 0x05: level 1 translation fault
Data abort info:
ISV = 0, ISS = 0x00000005, ISS2 = 0x00000000
CM = 0, WnR = 0, TnD = 0, TagAccess = 0
GCS = 0, Overlay = 0, DirtyBit = 0, Xs = 0
swapper pgtable: 4k pages, 48-bit VAs, pgdp=000000000255a000
[ffff0002100296e0] pgd=18000001ffff7003, p4d=18000001ffff7003,
pud=0000000000000000
Internal error: Oops: 0000000096000005 [#1] PREEMPT SMP
Modules linked in:
CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 6.8.0-rc2-next-20240130+ #14392
Hardware name: Hardkernel ODROID-M1 (DT)
pstate: 600000c9 (nZCv daIF -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--)
pc : wq_update_node_max_active+0x50/0x1fc
lr : wq_update_node_max_active+0x1f0/0x1fc
...
Call trace:
wq_update_node_max_active+0x50/0x1fc
apply_wqattrs_commit+0xf0/0x114
apply_workqueue_attrs_locked+0x58/0xa0
alloc_workqueue+0x5ac/0x774
workqueue_init_early+0x460/0x540
start_kernel+0x258/0x684
__primary_switched+0xb8/0xc0
Code: 9100a273 35000d01 53067f00 d0016dc1 (f8607a60)
---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task! ]---
Fix it by initializing wq->node_nr_active[].max to WQ_DFL_MIN_ACTIVE on
allocation and making wq_update_node_max_active() noop until
workqueue_init_topology(). Note that workqueue_init_topology() invokes
wq_update_node_max_active() on all unbound workqueues, so the end result is
still the same.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Reported-by: Marek Szyprowski <[email protected]>
Reported-by: Nathan Chancellor <[email protected]>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Fixes: 5797b1c18919 ("workqueue: Implement system-wide nr_active enforcement for unbound workqueues")
---
kernel/workqueue.c | 8 ++++++++
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 9221a4c57ae1..a65081ec6780 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -386,6 +386,8 @@ static const char *wq_affn_names[WQ_AFFN_NR_TYPES] = {
[WQ_AFFN_SYSTEM] = "system",
};
+static bool wq_topo_initialized = false;
+
/*
* Per-cpu work items which run for longer than the following threshold are
* automatically considered CPU intensive and excluded from concurrency
@@ -1510,6 +1512,9 @@ static void wq_update_node_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int off_cpu)
lockdep_assert_held(&wq->mutex);
+ if (!wq_topo_initialized)
+ return;
+
if (!cpumask_test_cpu(off_cpu, effective))
off_cpu = -1;
@@ -4356,6 +4361,7 @@ static void free_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active **nna_ar)
static void init_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active *nna)
{
+ nna->max = WQ_DFL_MIN_ACTIVE;
atomic_set(&nna->nr, 0);
raw_spin_lock_init(&nna->lock);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&nna->pending_pwqs);
@@ -7400,6 +7406,8 @@ void __init workqueue_init_topology(void)
init_pod_type(&wq_pod_types[WQ_AFFN_CACHE], cpus_share_cache);
init_pod_type(&wq_pod_types[WQ_AFFN_NUMA], cpus_share_numa);
+ wq_topo_initialized = true;
+
mutex_lock(&wq_pool_mutex);
/*
Hello,
Thanks for the report. Can you please see whether the following patch fixes
the problem?
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Thanks.
--
tejun
Hi Tejun,
On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 06:02:52PM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Thanks for the report. Can you please test whether the following patch fixes
> the problem?
I just tested this change on top of 5797b1c18919 but it does not appear
to resolve the issue for any of the three configurations that I tested.
Cheers,
Nathan
> ----- 8< -----
> From: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
> Subject: workqueue: Fix crash due to premature NUMA topology access on some archs
>
> System workqueues are allocated early during boot from
> workqueue_init_early(). While allocating unbound workqueues,
> wq_update_node_max_active() is invoked from apply_workqueue_attrs() and
> accesses NUMA topology information - cpumask_of_node() and cpu_to_node().
>
> At this point, topology information is not initialized yet and on arm and
> some other archs, it leads to an oops like the following:
>
> Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address ffff0002100296e0
> Mem abort info:
> ESR = 0x0000000096000005
> EC = 0x25: DABT (current EL), IL = 32 bits
> SET = 0, FnV = 0
> EA = 0, S1PTW = 0
> FSC = 0x05: level 1 translation fault
> Data abort info:
> ISV = 0, ISS = 0x00000005, ISS2 = 0x00000000
> CM = 0, WnR = 0, TnD = 0, TagAccess = 0
> GCS = 0, Overlay = 0, DirtyBit = 0, Xs = 0
> swapper pgtable: 4k pages, 48-bit VAs, pgdp=000000000255a000
> [ffff0002100296e0] pgd=18000001ffff7003, p4d=18000001ffff7003,
> pud=0000000000000000
> Internal error: Oops: 0000000096000005 [#1] PREEMPT SMP
> Modules linked in:
> CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 6.8.0-rc2-next-20240130+ #14392
> Hardware name: Hardkernel ODROID-M1 (DT)
> pstate: 600000c9 (nZCv daIF -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--)
> pc : wq_update_node_max_active+0x50/0x1fc
> lr : wq_update_node_max_active+0x1f0/0x1fc
> ...
> Call trace:
> wq_update_node_max_active+0x50/0x1fc
> apply_wqattrs_commit+0xf0/0x114
> apply_workqueue_attrs_locked+0x58/0xa0
> alloc_workqueue+0x5ac/0x774
> workqueue_init_early+0x460/0x540
> start_kernel+0x258/0x684
> __primary_switched+0xb8/0xc0
> Code: 9100a273 35000d01 53067f00 d0016dc1 (f8607a60)
> ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
> Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
> ---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task! ]---
>
> Fix it by initializing wq->node_nr_active[].max to WQ_DFL_MIN_ACTIVE on
> allocation and making wq_update_node_max_active() noop until
> workqueue_init_topology(). Note that workqueue_init_topology() invokes
> wq_update_node_max_active() on all unbound workqueues, so the end result is
> still the same.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
> Reported-by: Marek Szyprowski <[email protected]>
> Reported-by: Nathan Chancellor <[email protected]>
> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
> Fixes: 5797b1c18919 ("workqueue: Implement system-wide nr_active enforcement for unbound workqueues")
> ---
> kernel/workqueue.c | 8 ++++++++
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
> index 9221a4c57ae1..a65081ec6780 100644
> --- a/kernel/workqueue.c
> +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
> @@ -386,6 +386,8 @@ static const char *wq_affn_names[WQ_AFFN_NR_TYPES] = {
> [WQ_AFFN_SYSTEM] = "system",
> };
>
> +static bool wq_topo_initialized = false;
> +
> /*
> * Per-cpu work items which run for longer than the following threshold are
> * automatically considered CPU intensive and excluded from concurrency
> @@ -1510,6 +1512,9 @@ static void wq_update_node_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int off_cpu)
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&wq->mutex);
>
> + if (!wq_topo_initialized)
> + return;
> +
> if (!cpumask_test_cpu(off_cpu, effective))
> off_cpu = -1;
>
> @@ -4356,6 +4361,7 @@ static void free_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active **nna_ar)
>
> static void init_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active *nna)
> {
> + nna->max = WQ_DFL_MIN_ACTIVE;
> atomic_set(&nna->nr, 0);
> raw_spin_lock_init(&nna->lock);
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&nna->pending_pwqs);
> @@ -7400,6 +7406,8 @@ void __init workqueue_init_topology(void)
> init_pod_type(&wq_pod_types[WQ_AFFN_CACHE], cpus_share_cache);
> init_pod_type(&wq_pod_types[WQ_AFFN_NUMA], cpus_share_numa);
>
> + wq_topo_initialized = true;
> +
> mutex_lock(&wq_pool_mutex);
>
> /*
On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 09:12:05PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> Hi Tejun,
>
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 06:02:52PM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Thanks for the report. Can you please test whether the following patch fixes
> > the problem?
>
> I just tested this change on top of 5797b1c18919 but it does not appear
> to resolve the issue for any of the three configurations that I tested.
Bummer. Can you map the faulting address to the source line?
Thanks.
--
tejun
On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 06:13:02PM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 09:12:05PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> > Hi Tejun,
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 06:02:52PM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Thanks for the report. Can you please test whether the following patch fixes
> > > the problem?
> >
> > I just tested this change on top of 5797b1c18919 but it does not appear
> > to resolve the issue for any of the three configurations that I tested.
>
> Bummer. Can you map the faulting address to the source line?
Sure, here is the arm64 stacktrace run through
scripts/decode_stacktrace.sh, the line numbers correspond to your tree
at 5797b1c18919.
[ 0.000000] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address ffff000021c0b380
[ 0.000000] Mem abort info:
[ 0.000000] ESR = 0x0000000096000006
[ 0.000000] EC = 0x25: DABT (current EL), IL = 32 bits
[ 0.000000] SET = 0, FnV = 0
[ 0.000000] EA = 0, S1PTW = 0
[ 0.000000] FSC = 0x06: level 2 translation fault
[ 0.000000] Data abort info:
[ 0.000000] ISV = 0, ISS = 0x00000006, ISS2 = 0x00000000
[ 0.000000] CM = 0, WnR = 0, TnD = 0, TagAccess = 0
[ 0.000000] GCS = 0, Overlay = 0, DirtyBit = 0, Xs = 0
[ 0.000000] swapper pgtable: 4k pages, 48-bit VAs, pgdp=00000000413b1000
[ 0.000000] [ffff000021c0b380] pgd=180000005fff7003, p4d=180000005fff7003, pud=180000005fff6003, pmd=0000000000000000
[ 0.000000] Internal error: Oops: 0000000096000006 [#1] PREEMPT SMP
[ 0.000000] Modules linked in:
[ 0.000000] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 6.7.0-09946-g5797b1c18919 #1
[ 0.000000] Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT)
[ 0.000000] pstate: 600000c9 (nZCv daIF -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--)
[ 0.000000] pc : wq_update_node_max_active (include/asm-generic/bitops/generic-non-atomic.h:128 include/linux/cpumask.h:504 kernel/workqueue.c:1513)
[ 0.000000] lr : apply_wqattrs_commit (kernel/workqueue.c:4838)
[ 0.000000] sp : ffff8000814b3be0
[ 0.000000] x29: ffff8000814b3be0 x28: ffff000001c0d600 x27: 0000000000000000
[ 0.000000] x26: ffff000001c0d6c0 x25: 0000000000000001 x24: 0000000000000200
[ 0.000000] x23: 00000000ffffffff x22: ffff8000814b9c40 x21: 0000000000000008
[ 0.000000] x20: ffff8000814b9a40 x19: ffff000001c0b360 x18: ffff00001feebed0
[ 0.000000] x17: 0000000000c65c70 x16: ffff00001feebb28 x15: fffffc0000070488
[ 0.000000] x14: 0000000000000000 x13: 0000000000000000 x12: ffff00001feebb28
[ 0.000000] x11: 0000000000000001 x10: ffff000001c0b388 x9 : 0000000000000000
[ 0.000000] x8 : 0000000000000000 x7 : 0000000000000000 x6 : ffff000001c0d600
[ 0.000000] x5 : ffff000001c0d600 x4 : ffff000001c0e880 x3 : ffff000001c0d600
[ 0.000000] x2 : ffff000001c0b388 x1 : ffff8000814b9000 x0 : 0000000003ffffff
[ 0.000000] Call trace:
[ 0.000000] wq_update_node_max_active (include/asm-generic/bitops/generic-non-atomic.h:128 include/linux/cpumask.h:504 kernel/workqueue.c:1513)
[ 0.000000] apply_wqattrs_commit (kernel/workqueue.c:4838)
[ 0.000000] apply_workqueue_attrs_locked (kernel/workqueue.c:4745 kernel/workqueue.c:4864)
[ 0.000000] alloc_workqueue (kernel/workqueue.c:4894 kernel/workqueue.c:5015 kernel/workqueue.c:5224)
[ 0.000000] workqueue_init_early (kernel/workqueue.c:7210)
[ 0.000000] start_kernel (init/main.c:965)
[ 0.000000] __primary_switched (arch/arm64/kernel/head.S:524)
[ 0.000000] Code: f9418033 d000a081 9100a262 f90037e2 (f8607840)
All code
========
0:* 33 80 41 f9 81 a0 xor -0x5f7e06bf(%rax),%eax <-- trapping instruction
6: 00 d0 add %dl,%al
8: 62 a2 00 91 e2 (bad)
d: 37 (bad)
e: 00 f9 add %bh,%cl
10: 40 78 60 rex js 0x73
13: f8 clc
Code starting with the faulting instruction
===========================================
0: 40 78 60 rex js 0x63
3: f8 clc
[ 0.000000] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
[ 0.000000] Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
[ 0.000000] ---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task! ]---
Cheers,
Nathan
On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 09:20:31PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 06:13:02PM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 09:12:05PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> > > Hi Tejun,
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 06:02:52PM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the report. Can you please test whether the following patch fixes
> > > > the problem?
> > >
> > > I just tested this change on top of 5797b1c18919 but it does not appear
> > > to resolve the issue for any of the three configurations that I tested.
> >
> > Bummer. Can you map the faulting address to the source line?
>
> Sure, here is the arm64 stacktrace run through
> scripts/decode_stacktrace.sh, the line numbers correspond to your tree
> at 5797b1c18919.
Ah, I see. How about the following?
Thanks.
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 9221a4c57ae1..31c1373505d8 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -1510,7 +1510,7 @@ static void wq_update_node_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int off_cpu)
lockdep_assert_held(&wq->mutex);
- if (!cpumask_test_cpu(off_cpu, effective))
+ if (off_cpu >= 0 && !cpumask_test_cpu(off_cpu, effective))
off_cpu = -1;
total_cpus = cpumask_weight_and(effective, cpu_online_mask);
--
tejun
On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 06:24:51PM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 09:20:31PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 06:13:02PM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 09:12:05PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> > > > Hi Tejun,
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 06:02:52PM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the report. Can you please test whether the following patch fixes
> > > > > the problem?
> > > >
> > > > I just tested this change on top of 5797b1c18919 but it does not appear
> > > > to resolve the issue for any of the three configurations that I tested.
> > >
> > > Bummer. Can you map the faulting address to the source line?
> >
> > Sure, here is the arm64 stacktrace run through
> > scripts/decode_stacktrace.sh, the line numbers correspond to your tree
> > at 5797b1c18919.
>
> Ah, I see. How about the following?
>
> Thanks.
That works for three easy to test configurations that were broken,
thanks!
Tested-by: Nathan Chancellor <[email protected]>
> diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
> index 9221a4c57ae1..31c1373505d8 100644
> --- a/kernel/workqueue.c
> +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
> @@ -1510,7 +1510,7 @@ static void wq_update_node_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int off_cpu)
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&wq->mutex);
>
> - if (!cpumask_test_cpu(off_cpu, effective))
> + if (off_cpu >= 0 && !cpumask_test_cpu(off_cpu, effective))
> off_cpu = -1;
>
> total_cpus = cpumask_weight_and(effective, cpu_online_mask);
>
> --
> tejun
From 15930da42f8981dc42c19038042947b475b19f47 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2024 18:55:55 -1000
Subject: [PATCH] workqueue: Don't call cpumask_test_cpu() with -1 CPU in
wq_update_node_max_active()
For wq_update_node_max_active(), @off_cpu of -1 indicates that no CPU is
going down. The function was incorrectly calling cpumask_test_cpu() with -1
CPU leading to oopses like the following on some archs:
Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address ffff0002100296e0
..
pc : wq_update_node_max_active+0x50/0x1fc
lr : wq_update_node_max_active+0x1f0/0x1fc
...
Call trace:
wq_update_node_max_active+0x50/0x1fc
apply_wqattrs_commit+0xf0/0x114
apply_workqueue_attrs_locked+0x58/0xa0
alloc_workqueue+0x5ac/0x774
workqueue_init_early+0x460/0x540
start_kernel+0x258/0x684
__primary_switched+0xb8/0xc0
Code: 9100a273 35000d01 53067f00 d0016dc1 (f8607a60)
---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task! ]---
Fix it.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Reported-by: Marek Szyprowski <[email protected]>
Reported-by: Nathan Chancellor <[email protected]>
Tested-by: Nathan Chancellor <[email protected]>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Fixes: 5797b1c18919 ("workqueue: Implement system-wide nr_active enforcement for unbound workqueues")
---
Applied to wq/for-6.9.
Thanks.
kernel/workqueue.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 9221a4c57ae1..31c1373505d8 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -1510,7 +1510,7 @@ static void wq_update_node_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int off_cpu)
lockdep_assert_held(&wq->mutex);
- if (!cpumask_test_cpu(off_cpu, effective))
+ if (off_cpu >= 0 && !cpumask_test_cpu(off_cpu, effective))
off_cpu = -1;
total_cpus = cpumask_weight_and(effective, cpu_online_mask);
--
2.43.0
From 28596c7850a72ee82dc33758f81b71b4e8954c73 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2024 19:06:43 -1000
System workqueues are allocated early during boot from
workqueue_init_early(). While allocating unbound workqueues,
wq_update_node_max_active() is invoked from apply_workqueue_attrs() and
accesses NUMA topology to initialize wq->node_nr_active[].max.
However, topology information may not be set up at this point.
wq_update_node_max_active() is explicitly invoked from
workqueue_init_topology() later when topology information is known to be
available.
This doesn't seem to crash anything but it's doing useless work with dubious
data. Let's skip the premature and duplicate node_max_active updates by
initializing the field to WQ_DFL_MIN_ACTIVE on allocation and making
wq_update_node_max_active() noop until workqueue_init_topology().
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
---
Hello,
This doesn't seem to be causing immediate problems but let's nip it in the
bud. Applied to wq/for-6.9.
Thanks.
kernel/workqueue.c | 8 ++++++++
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 31c1373505d8..ffb625db9771 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -386,6 +386,8 @@ static const char *wq_affn_names[WQ_AFFN_NR_TYPES] = {
[WQ_AFFN_SYSTEM] = "system",
};
+static bool wq_topo_initialized __read_mostly = false;
+
/*
* Per-cpu work items which run for longer than the following threshold are
* automatically considered CPU intensive and excluded from concurrency
@@ -1510,6 +1512,9 @@ static void wq_update_node_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int off_cpu)
lockdep_assert_held(&wq->mutex);
+ if (!wq_topo_initialized)
+ return;
+
if (off_cpu >= 0 && !cpumask_test_cpu(off_cpu, effective))
off_cpu = -1;
@@ -4356,6 +4361,7 @@ static void free_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active **nna_ar)
static void init_node_nr_active(struct wq_node_nr_active *nna)
{
+ nna->max = WQ_DFL_MIN_ACTIVE;
atomic_set(&nna->nr, 0);
raw_spin_lock_init(&nna->lock);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&nna->pending_pwqs);
@@ -7400,6 +7406,8 @@ void __init workqueue_init_topology(void)
init_pod_type(&wq_pod_types[WQ_AFFN_CACHE], cpus_share_cache);
init_pod_type(&wq_pod_types[WQ_AFFN_NUMA], cpus_share_numa);
+ wq_topo_initialized = true;
+
mutex_lock(&wq_pool_mutex);
/*
--
2.43.0
On 31.01.2024 06:01, Tejun Heo wrote:
> From: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2024 18:55:55 -1000
> Subject: [PATCH] workqueue: Don't call cpumask_test_cpu() with -1 CPU in
> wq_update_node_max_active()
>
> For wq_update_node_max_active(), @off_cpu of -1 indicates that no CPU is
> going down. The function was incorrectly calling cpumask_test_cpu() with -1
> CPU leading to oopses like the following on some archs:
>
> Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address ffff0002100296e0
> ..
> pc : wq_update_node_max_active+0x50/0x1fc
> lr : wq_update_node_max_active+0x1f0/0x1fc
> ...
> Call trace:
> wq_update_node_max_active+0x50/0x1fc
> apply_wqattrs_commit+0xf0/0x114
> apply_workqueue_attrs_locked+0x58/0xa0
> alloc_workqueue+0x5ac/0x774
> workqueue_init_early+0x460/0x540
> start_kernel+0x258/0x684
> __primary_switched+0xb8/0xc0
> Code: 9100a273 35000d01 53067f00 d0016dc1 (f8607a60)
> ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
> Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
> ---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task! ]---
>
> Fix it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
> Reported-by: Marek Szyprowski <[email protected]>
> Reported-by: Nathan Chancellor <[email protected]>
> Tested-by: Nathan Chancellor <[email protected]>
> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
> Fixes: 5797b1c18919 ("workqueue: Implement system-wide nr_active enforcement for unbound workqueues")
Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <[email protected]>
> ---
> Applied to wq/for-6.9.
>
> Thanks.
>
> kernel/workqueue.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
> index 9221a4c57ae1..31c1373505d8 100644
> --- a/kernel/workqueue.c
> +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
> @@ -1510,7 +1510,7 @@ static void wq_update_node_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int off_cpu)
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&wq->mutex);
>
> - if (!cpumask_test_cpu(off_cpu, effective))
> + if (off_cpu >= 0 && !cpumask_test_cpu(off_cpu, effective))
> off_cpu = -1;
>
> total_cpus = cpumask_weight_and(effective, cpu_online_mask);
Best regards
--
Marek Szyprowski, PhD
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 06:24:51PM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Ah, I see. How about the following?
>
> Thanks.
>
> diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
> index 9221a4c57ae1..31c1373505d8 100644
> --- a/kernel/workqueue.c
> +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
> @@ -1510,7 +1510,7 @@ static void wq_update_node_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int off_cpu)
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&wq->mutex);
>
> - if (!cpumask_test_cpu(off_cpu, effective))
> + if (off_cpu >= 0 && !cpumask_test_cpu(off_cpu, effective))
> off_cpu = -1;
This commit was also breaking at91sam9g20ek (and still is in today's
-next), the fix here gets that booting again:
Tested-by: Mark Brown <[email protected]>