Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754585AbbG0VMW (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jul 2015 17:12:22 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:49934 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753864AbbG0VMU (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jul 2015 17:12:20 -0400 Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 00:12:16 +0300 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Bandan Das Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Eyal Moscovici , Razya Ladelsky , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, jasowang@redhat.com, Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] vhost: Add cgroup-aware creation of worker threads Message-ID: <20150728000758-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> References: <1436760455-5686-1-git-send-email-bsd@redhat.com> <1436760455-5686-5-git-send-email-bsd@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1436760455-5686-5-git-send-email-bsd@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3550 Lines: 106 On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 12:07:35AM -0400, Bandan Das wrote: > With the help of the cgroup function to compare groups introduced > in the previous patch, this changes worker creation policy. > If the new device belongs to different cgroups than any of the > devices we are currently serving, we end up creating a new worker > thread even if we haven't reached the devs_per_worker threshold > > Signed-off-by: Bandan Das Would it make sense to integrate this in the work-queue mechanism somehow? Just a thought - correctly accounting kernel's work on behalf of specific userspace groups might have value generally. Or is the usecase too special? Cc Tejun for comments. > --- > drivers/vhost/vhost.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------- > 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c > index 6a5d4c0..dc0fa37 100644 > --- a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c > +++ b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c > @@ -261,12 +261,6 @@ static int vhost_worker(void *data) > use_mm(dev->mm); > } > > - /* TODO: Consider a more elegant solution */ > - if (worker->owner != dev->owner) { > - /* Should check for return value */ > - cgroup_attach_task_all(dev->owner, current); > - worker->owner = dev->owner; > - } > work->fn(work); > if (need_resched()) > schedule(); > @@ -278,6 +272,36 @@ static int vhost_worker(void *data) > return 0; > } > > +struct vhost_attach_cgroups_struct { > + struct vhost_work work; > + struct task_struct *owner; > + int ret; > +}; > + > +static void vhost_attach_cgroups_work(struct vhost_work *work) > +{ > + struct vhost_attach_cgroups_struct *s; > + > + s = container_of(work, struct vhost_attach_cgroups_struct, work); > + s->ret = cgroup_attach_task_all(s->owner, current); > +} > + > +static void vhost_attach_cgroups(struct vhost_dev *dev, > + struct vhost_worker *worker) > +{ > + struct vhost_attach_cgroups_struct attach; > + > + attach.owner = dev->owner; > + vhost_work_init(dev, &attach.work, vhost_attach_cgroups_work); > + vhost_work_queue(worker, &attach.work); > + vhost_work_flush(worker, &attach.work); > + > + if (!attach.ret) > + worker->owner = dev->owner; > + > + dev->err = attach.ret; > +} > + > static void vhost_create_worker(struct vhost_dev *dev) > { > struct vhost_worker *worker; > @@ -300,8 +324,14 @@ static void vhost_create_worker(struct vhost_dev *dev) > > spin_lock_init(&worker->work_lock); > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&worker->work_list); > + > + /* attach to the cgroups of the process that created us */ > + vhost_attach_cgroups(dev, worker); > + if (dev->err) > + goto therror; > + worker->owner = dev->owner; > + > list_add(&worker->node, &pool->workers); > - worker->owner = NULL; > worker->num_devices++; > total_vhost_workers++; > dev->worker = worker; > @@ -320,7 +350,8 @@ static int vhost_dev_assign_worker(struct vhost_dev *dev) > > mutex_lock(&vhost_pool->pool_lock); > list_for_each_entry(worker, &vhost_pool->workers, node) { > - if (worker->num_devices < devs_per_worker) { > + if (worker->num_devices < devs_per_worker && > + (!cgroup_match_groups(dev->owner, worker->owner))) { > dev->worker = worker; > dev->worker_assigned = true; > worker->num_devices++; > -- > 2.4.3 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/