Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
Sender: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 23 Feb 2022 11:33:02 -1000
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To:     Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Cc:     0day robot <lkp@intel.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        lkp@lists.01.org, kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] workqueue: Use private WQ for schedule_on_each_cpu() API
Message-ID: <YhaoDiJ8MUOhRmp6@slm.duckdns.org>
References: <20220221083358.GC835@xsang-OptiPlex-9020>
 <3a20c799-c18e-dd3a-3161-fee6bca1491e@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
 <YhUdjip4VSWe4zDO@slm.duckdns.org>
 <16a33a65-3c67-ef66-ccc8-9c4fffb0ae5a@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <16a33a65-3c67-ef66-ccc8-9c4fffb0ae5a@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 09:57:27AM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2022/02/23 2:29, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 07:38:09PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> >> Since schedule_on_each_cpu() calls schedule_work_on() and flush_work(),
> >> we should avoid using system_wq in order to avoid unexpected locking
> >> dependency.
> > 
> > I don't get it. schedule_on_each_cpu() is flushing each work item and thus
> > shouldn't need its own flushing domain. What's this change for?
> 
> A kernel test robot tested "[PATCH v2] workqueue: Warn flush attempt using
> system-wide workqueues" on 5.16.0-06523-g29bd199e4e73 and hit a lockdep
> warning ( https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220221083358.GC835@xsang-OptiPlex-9020 ).
> 
> Although the circular locking dependency itself needs to be handled by
> lockless console printing support, we won't be able to apply
> "[PATCH v2] workqueue: Warn flush attempt using system-wide workqueues"
> if schedule_on_each_cpu() continues using system-wide workqueues.

The patch seems pretty wrong. What's problematic is system workqueue flushes
(which flushes the entire workqueue), not work item flushes.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun