Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:1287:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id d7csp547911pxv; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 10:00:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw2keMN2EM5Sq26YgnHYLemoHBF2NtEItQoug3ouOVpBPFlrSzJ+wHHKxZtOoPMP1cOSAlw X-Received: by 2002:a5d:4d01:: with SMTP id z1mr6739215wrt.34.1626368444082; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 10:00:44 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1626368444; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=KC1ZoAXYtPar5Wi+3OFB9JLbTp9Jdr+6COh9bA6up7rqV8G3ndn7fCIDKtcFZfC0pe 2Wli9UOfSEB6ytrqYe4fp0rURAMSDVnuKwaKglIX1DVlle2QlL3fjHXcbq4RqVweuCpu 4IaYVIJN5OXNKSZRGKtAjqHJ84r6ubscO3ErPsmWfPChnP0p0ZFveAN0Chh6ZVwFMJ9V /cwnbxTZUsBMH1FevceqRsoVKM/JEoJVnSMuB7uxeSCc4Lm7TIsGcV7sRi8CQ4Xc4D3Y jL6T6peVHXYFaD8N37m4pYyVerc5wJh9SFj6096nbKSWeScQdp/fyaiDFB6GyCuWVlt6 8Z4Q== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :user-agent:references:in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject :message-id:dkim-signature; bh=VIGlNohesPyZovg0nZZcz5+kmHfu4ux+1Kmisqf7/3w=; b=wJqSKOQdcy62RtnAjCWt9GMSop6e2HE3YhzpRmBdsWJqdYq7VIjtNN4OD65MC/tzAj 2pVeRzS/469G4UwAmMuxYpNzSDCqa8WQxkeTjwUGTyCfRu/FePFu7oBr9YtAsfDLJvwY a93BpSRi5KYQq+l8Fao5b6cVd8iXBaQljbx98bRDkcYXL57HksMzc/whF1Lgadhj3KJ1 L2aZBZOBwmzTKEwukXrreyLcuKLGz5SR5Dhq9hUNN+GVVlgaOhxDCCXCIsHoHHjYmxDS VZxOJP3NMzkXdCKjk4U807uAJZKi/V/1ytEU8rlwwSEmcEw1nizzGuFQOChcFNoJ4Ac5 CekQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=Ljdle4Iv; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id q13si7208770ejd.76.2021.07.15.10.00.19; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 10:00:44 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=Ljdle4Iv; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231524AbhGOQeE (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 15 Jul 2021 12:34:04 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52538 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230162AbhGOQeE (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jul 2021 12:34:04 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-x333.google.com (mail-wm1-x333.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::333]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7244FC06175F; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 09:31:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm1-x333.google.com with SMTP id w13so4092891wmc.3; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 09:31:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=VIGlNohesPyZovg0nZZcz5+kmHfu4ux+1Kmisqf7/3w=; b=Ljdle4IvRA3NB7DUbAjuEedye1YL8RD2LdcN/LIwiXXR7UsuvzbPOZJ+uzPxmWJt/7 mGtNWneZT4c8oPi2tpAtLxeHyu8BHSNoIsGB8tNq+pfwjlE8irWQQS+n8FvrLku1JQJ8 RGT3N6j1QRhepnrzsY9+1DcNqeDfVxFHzYeumU/I3lnP6JIvGTh55yDi4kVJH5UUAcoz B6NiuIsd6alq7WM2IIckz5rEyzdNxrWbis2F5xT43jrvhvsCriHNkJHMt9hCXSg0dWO7 ROAaQye2a3zlYKW67l7gmRLW8jnxuYqKMUeFUN6sLz8whMEcBOC/pD7A08Sn03QbUW0e cYuQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=VIGlNohesPyZovg0nZZcz5+kmHfu4ux+1Kmisqf7/3w=; b=iRzuVgOU1WFeDyt3+LcGtJa9NTOVQfJia/VDXeP5w8OQaWMqBiQ2pa166+XtQOdIQo 32GTsfF8JFE2eFOlV6zn4KrbnMGDL8COrTzTGF+XiGm633GY26HWRBHOpFJmDe2kfZmO s5Wm2P1FNJHdJ9BBiK/l4hJNedqJU2jXjOXWtdnTtIRkeLUkxVwKYEkwej9TMzj4jTDs RWZh6hNg5Cqo6PTUn+pTxJJT631aJ4ZKKPjssWP2lScqBWTfe1FPR76xg2DpmYT+N/NF fdsZW/YTbrLa/95085eVG4xrgcXXOit1avHlyAgfAiDb5FjdJ6NZF6kBchCcNpuJccF6 BB0w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Y5aTlcMe0Imvg9AtApEoWa0kyN6f5rUWsOHCnIluzHaUXUwiU xamUQaZr+nHUa/MKQIz4DpQ= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:f616:: with SMTP id w22mr5460327wmc.131.1626366668921; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 09:31:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:b07:6456:fd99:ced0:db1c:53e1:191e? ([2001:b07:6456:fd99:ced0:db1c:53e1:191e]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 139sm6584824wma.32.2021.07.15.09.31.07 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 15 Jul 2021 09:31:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 01/10] perf workqueue: threadpool creation and destruction From: Riccardo Mancini To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Cc: Ian Rogers , Namhyung Kim , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Mark Rutland , Jiri Olsa , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, Alexey Bayduraev Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2021 18:31:07 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <46f9e291af3d87c212d279717d56eeab4cbfde68.1626177381.git.rickyman7@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.40.2 (3.40.2-1.fc34) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Arnaldo, thanks for reviewing the patch! On Wed, 2021-07-14 at 11:16 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > + > > +enum threadpool_status { > > +       THREADPOOL_STATUS__STOPPED,             /* no threads */ > > +       THREADPOOL_STATUS__ERROR,               /* errors */ > > +       THREADPOOL_STATUS__MAX > > +}; > > + > > +struct threadpool_struct { > > Can this be just 'struct threadpool'? I think its descriptive enough: I agree, but I wanted to keep the naming consistent between workqueue.c and threadpool.c. > > > +       int                     nr_threads;     /* number of threads in the > > pool */ > > +       struct thread_struct    *threads;       /* array of threads in the > > pool */ > > +       struct task_struct      *current_task;  /* current executing > > function > > */ > > +       enum threadpool_status  status;         /* current status of the > > pool > > */ > > +}; > > + > > +struct thread_struct { > > +       int                             idx;    /* idx of thread in pool- > > > threads */ > > +       pid_t                           tid;    /* tid of thread */ > > +       struct threadpool_struct        *pool;  /* parent threadpool */ > > +       struct { > > +               int from[2];                    /* messages from thread > > (acks) > > */ > > +               int to[2];                      /* messages to thread > > (commands) */ > > +       } pipes; > > +}; > > This one, since we have already a 'struct thread' in tools/perf, to > represent a PERF_RECORD_FORK, perhaps we can call it 'struct > threadpool_entry'? Agreed. > > > + > > +/** > > + * init_pipes - initialize all pipes of @thread > > + */ > > +static void init_pipes(struct thread_struct *thread) > > +{ > > +       thread->pipes.from[0] = -1; > > +       thread->pipes.from[1] = -1; > > +       thread->pipes.to[0] = -1; > > +       thread->pipes.to[1] = -1; > > +} > > + > > +/** > > + * open_pipes - open all pipes of @thread > > + */ > > +static int open_pipes(struct thread_struct *thread) > > Here please: > > threadpool_entry__open_pipes() > > Its longer, but helps with ctags/cscope navigation and we can go > directly to it via: > > :ta threadpool_entry__open_p > > While 'ta: open_pipes' may bo to various places where this idiom is > used. Agreed. > > +/** > > + * create_threadpool - create a fixed threadpool with @n_threads threads > > + */ > > +struct threadpool_struct *create_threadpool(int n_threads) > > > Is this already something the kernel has and thus we should keep the > naming? I couldn't find it in the kernel, so please name it: > > struct threadpool *threadpool__new(int nthreads) As before, I did this to keep consistency with workqueue. Since this threadpool+workqueue can be a standalone library, I preferred to keep the naming consistent inside it, instead of making it consistent with perf (this is what I was referring to in the cover letter, not just the workqueue API). What do you think? I also prefer perf's naming conventions, but it'd feel strange to use two different naming conventions inside the same library. > > > +{ > > +       int ret, t; > > +       struct threadpool_struct *pool = malloc(sizeof(*pool)); > > + > > +       if (!pool) { > > +               pr_err("threadpool: cannot allocate pool: %s\n", > > +                       strerror(errno));o > > Humm, pr_err() at this level isn't appropriate, please make callers > complain. ok. > > > +               return NULL; > > +       } > > + > > +       if (n_threads <= 0) { > > +               pr_err("threadpool: invalid number of threads: %d\n", > > +                       n_threads); > > pr_debug() ok > > > +               goto out_free_pool; > > +       } > > + > > +       pool->nr_threads = n_threads; > > +       pool->current_task = NULL; > > + > > +       pool->threads = malloc(n_threads * sizeof(*pool->threads)); > > +       if (!pool->threads) { > > +               pr_err("threadpool: cannot allocate threads: %s\n", > > +                       strerror(errno)); > > +               goto out_free_pool; > > +       } > > + > > +       for (t = 0; t < n_threads; t++) { > > +               pool->threads[t].idx = t; > > +               pool->threads[t].tid = -1; > > +               pool->threads[t].pool = pool; > > +               init_pipes(&pool->threads[t]); > > +       } > > + > > +       for (t = 0; t < n_threads; t++) { > > +               ret = open_pipes(&pool->threads[t]); > > +               if (ret) > > +                       goto out_close_pipes; > > +       } > > + > > +       pool->status = THREADPOOL_STATUS__STOPPED; > > + > > +       return pool; > > + > > +out_close_pipes: > > +       for (t = 0; t < n_threads; t++) > > +               close_pipes(&pool->threads[t]); > > + > > +       free(pool->threads); > > +out_free_pool: > > +       free(pool); > > +       return NULL; > > Here we can use ERR_PTR()/PTR_ERR() to let the caller know what was the > problem, i.e. we can ditch all the pr_err/pr_debug(), etc and instead > have a threadpool__strerror(struct threadpool *pool, int err) like we > have for 'struct evsel', please take a look at evsel__open_strerror(). Thanks, I'll have a look at it. So, what I sould do is not use pr_* higher than debug inside library code and return meaningful errors through PR_ERR, right? > > > > +} > > + > > +/** > > + * destroy_threadpool - free the @pool and all its resources > > + */ > > +void destroy_threadpool(struct threadpool_struct *pool) > > > void threadpool__delete(struct threadpool *pool) > > +{ > > +       int t; > > + > > +       if (!pool) > > +               return; > > + > > +       WARN_ON(pool->status != THREADPOOL_STATUS__STOPPED > > +               && pool->status != THREADPOOL_STATUS__ERROR); > > + > > +       for (t = 0; t < pool->nr_threads; t++) > > +               close_pipes(&pool->threads[t]); > > reset pool->threads[t] to -1 already inside close_pipes. I agree it might be confusing without the threadpool_entry__ prefix. > > > + > > +       free(pool->threads); > > zfree In general, when should I use zfree instead of free? > > > +       free(pool); > > +} > > + > > +/** > > + * threadpool_size - get number of threads in the threadpool > > + */ > > +int threadpool_size(struct threadpool_struct *pool) >   > threadpool__size() ok Thanks, Riccardo > > > +{ > > +       return pool->nr_threads; > > +} > > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/workqueue/threadpool.h > > b/tools/perf/util/workqueue/threadpool.h > > new file mode 100644 > > index 0000000000000000..2b9388c768a0b588 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/tools/perf/util/workqueue/threadpool.h > > @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ > > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > > +#ifndef __WORKQUEUE_THREADPOOL_H > > +#define __WORKQUEUE_THREADPOOL_H > > + > > +struct threadpool_struct; > > +struct task_struct; > > + > > +typedef void (*task_func_t)(int tidx, struct task_struct *task); > > + > > +struct task_struct { > > +       task_func_t fn; > > +}; > > + > > +extern struct threadpool_struct *create_threadpool(int n_threads); > > +extern void destroy_threadpool(struct threadpool_struct *pool); > > + > > +extern int threadpool_size(struct threadpool_struct *pool); > > + > > +#endif /* __WORKQUEUE_THREADPOOL_H */ > > -- > > 2.31.1 > > >