All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@linux.alibaba.com>,
	Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
	Qian Cai <cai@redhat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH 10/10] workqueue: Fix affinity of kworkers when attaching into pool
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 23:54:57 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201214155457.3430-11-jiangshanlai@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201214155457.3430-1-jiangshanlai@gmail.com>

From: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@linux.alibaba.com>

When worker_attach_to_pool() is called, we should not put the workers
to pool->attrs->cpumask when there is not CPU online in it.

We have to use wq_online_cpumask in worker_attach_to_pool() to check
if pool->attrs->cpumask is valid rather than cpu_online_mask or
cpu_active_mask due to gaps between stages in cpu hot[un]plug.

To use wq_online_cpumask in worker_attach_to_pool(), we need to protect
wq_online_cpumask in wq_pool_attach_mutex and we modify workqueue_online_cpu()
and workqueue_offline_cpu() to enlarge wq_pool_attach_mutex protected
region. We also put updating wq_online_cpumask and [re|un]bind_workers()
in the same wq_pool_attach_mutex protected region to make the update
for percpu workqueue atomically.

Cc: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Cc: Qian Cai <cai@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20201210163830.21514-3-valentin.schneider@arm.com/
Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@linux.alibaba.com>
---
 kernel/workqueue.c | 32 +++++++++++++++-----------------
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 5ef41c567c2b..7a04cef90c1c 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -310,7 +310,7 @@ static bool workqueue_freezing;		/* PL: have wqs started freezing? */
 /* PL: allowable cpus for unbound wqs and work items */
 static cpumask_var_t wq_unbound_cpumask;
 
-/* PL: online cpus (cpu_online_mask with the going-down cpu cleared) */
+/* PL&A: online cpus (cpu_online_mask with the going-down cpu cleared) */
 static cpumask_var_t wq_online_cpumask;
 
 /* CPU where unbound work was last round robin scheduled from this CPU */
@@ -1848,11 +1848,11 @@ static void worker_attach_to_pool(struct worker *worker,
 {
 	mutex_lock(&wq_pool_attach_mutex);
 
-	/*
-	 * set_cpus_allowed_ptr() will fail if the cpumask doesn't have any
-	 * online CPUs.  It'll be re-applied when any of the CPUs come up.
-	 */
-	set_cpus_allowed_ptr(worker->task, pool->attrs->cpumask);
+	/* Is there any cpu in pool->attrs->cpumask online? */
+	if (cpumask_any_and(pool->attrs->cpumask, wq_online_cpumask) < nr_cpu_ids)
+		WARN_ON_ONCE(set_cpus_allowed_ptr(worker->task, pool->attrs->cpumask) < 0);
+	else
+		WARN_ON_ONCE(set_cpus_allowed_ptr(worker->task, cpu_possible_mask) < 0);
 
 	/*
 	 * The wq_pool_attach_mutex ensures %POOL_DISASSOCIATED remains
@@ -5079,13 +5079,12 @@ int workqueue_online_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
 	int pi;
 
 	mutex_lock(&wq_pool_mutex);
-	cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, wq_online_cpumask);
 
-	for_each_cpu_worker_pool(pool, cpu) {
-		mutex_lock(&wq_pool_attach_mutex);
+	mutex_lock(&wq_pool_attach_mutex);
+	cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, wq_online_cpumask);
+	for_each_cpu_worker_pool(pool, cpu)
 		rebind_workers(pool);
-		mutex_unlock(&wq_pool_attach_mutex);
-	}
+	mutex_unlock(&wq_pool_attach_mutex);
 
 	/* update CPU affinity of workers of unbound pools */
 	for_each_pool(pool, pi) {
@@ -5115,14 +5114,13 @@ int workqueue_offline_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
 	if (WARN_ON(cpu != smp_processor_id()))
 		return -1;
 
-	for_each_cpu_worker_pool(pool, cpu) {
-		mutex_lock(&wq_pool_attach_mutex);
-		unbind_workers(pool);
-		mutex_unlock(&wq_pool_attach_mutex);
-	}
-
 	mutex_lock(&wq_pool_mutex);
+
+	mutex_lock(&wq_pool_attach_mutex);
 	cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, wq_online_cpumask);
+	for_each_cpu_worker_pool(pool, cpu)
+		unbind_workers(pool);
+	mutex_unlock(&wq_pool_attach_mutex);
 
 	/* update CPU affinity of workers of unbound pools */
 	for_each_pool(pool, pi) {
-- 
2.19.1.6.gb485710b


  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-12-14 14:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-12-14 15:54 [PATCH 00/10] workqueue: break affinity initiatively Lai Jiangshan
2020-12-14 15:54 ` [PATCH 01/10] workqueue: restore unbound_workers' cpumask correctly Lai Jiangshan
2020-12-14 15:54 ` [PATCH 02/10] workqueue: use cpu_possible_mask instead of cpu_active_mask to break affinity Lai Jiangshan
2020-12-14 17:25   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-12-15  8:33     ` Lai Jiangshan
2020-12-15  8:40     ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-12-16 14:32   ` Tejun Heo
2020-12-14 15:54 ` [PATCH 03/10] workqueue: Manually break affinity on pool detachment Lai Jiangshan
2020-12-14 15:54 ` [PATCH 04/10] workqueue: don't set the worker's cpumask when kthread_bind_mask() Lai Jiangshan
2020-12-16 14:39   ` Tejun Heo
2020-12-14 15:54 ` [PATCH 05/10] workqueue: introduce wq_online_cpumask Lai Jiangshan
2020-12-14 15:54 ` [PATCH 06/10] workqueue: use wq_online_cpumask in restore_unbound_workers_cpumask() Lai Jiangshan
2020-12-14 15:54 ` [PATCH 07/10] workqueue: Manually break affinity on hotplug for unbound pool Lai Jiangshan
2020-12-16 14:50   ` Tejun Heo
2020-12-14 15:54 ` [PATCH 08/10] workqueue: reorganize workqueue_online_cpu() Lai Jiangshan
2020-12-14 15:54 ` [PATCH 09/10] workqueue: reorganize workqueue_offline_cpu() unbind_workers() Lai Jiangshan
2020-12-14 15:54 ` Lai Jiangshan [this message]
2020-12-15 15:03   ` [PATCH 10/10] workqueue: Fix affinity of kworkers when attaching into pool Valentin Schneider
2020-12-14 17:36 ` [PATCH 00/10] workqueue: break affinity initiatively Peter Zijlstra
2020-12-15  5:44   ` Lai Jiangshan
2020-12-15  7:50     ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-12-15  8:14       ` Lai Jiangshan
2020-12-15  8:49         ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-12-15  9:46           ` Lai Jiangshan
2020-12-16 14:30 ` Tejun Heo

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20201214155457.3430-11-jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --to=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=cai@redhat.com \
    --cc=laijs@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
    --cc=vincent.donnefort@arm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.