From: Jim Baxter <jim_baxter@mentor.com>
To: <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-mm@kvack.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Cc: "Resch Carsten (CM/ESO6)" <Carsten.Resch@de.bosch.com>,
"Rosca, Eugeniu (ADITG/ESB)" <erosca@de.adit-jv.com>
Subject: Re: PROBLEM: Long Workqueue delays V2
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 17:45:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d6845a3c-f139-fbaa-01d2-1ffa5397fd7a@mentor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <625615f2-3a6b-3136-35f9-2f2fb3c110cf@mentor.com>
Added linux-block List which may also be relevant to this issue.
On 18 Aug 2020 12:58, Jim Baxter wrote:
> I am asking this question again to include the fs-devel list.
>
>
> We have issues with the workqueue of the kernel overloading the CPU 0
> when we we disconnect a USB stick.
>
> This results in other items on the shared workqueue being delayed by
> around 6.5 seconds with a default kernel configuration and 2.3 seconds
> on a config tailored for our RCar embedded platform.
>
>
>
> We first noticed this issue on custom hardware and we have recreated it
> on an RCar Starter Kit using a test module [1] to replicate the
> behaviour, the test module outputs any delays of greater then 9ms.
>
> To run the test we have a 4GB random file on a USB stick and perform
> the following test.
> The stick is mounted as R/O and we are copying data from the stick:
>
> - Mount the stick.
> mount -o ro,remount /dev/sda1
>
> - Load the Module:
> # taskset -c 0 modprobe latency-mon
>
> - Copy large amount of data from the stick:
> # dd if=/run/media/sda1/sample.txt of=/dev/zero
> [ 1437.517603] DELAY: 10
> 8388607+1 records in
> 8388607+1 records out
>
>
> - Disconnect the USB stick:
> [ 1551.796792] usb 2-1: USB disconnect, device number 2
> [ 1558.625517] DELAY: 6782
>
>
> The Delay output 6782 is in milliseconds.
>
>
>
> Using umount stops the issue occurring but is unfortunately not guaranteed
> in our particular system.
>
>
> From my analysis the hub_event workqueue kworker/0:1+usb thread uses around
> 98% of the CPU.
>
> I have traced the workqueue:workqueue_queue_work function while unplugging the USB
> and there is no particular workqueue function being executed a lot more then the
> others for the kworker/0:1+usb thread.
>
>
> Using perf I identified the hub_events workqueue was spending a lot of time in
> invalidate_partition(), I have included a cut down the captured data from perf in
> [2] which shows the additional functions where the kworker spends most of its time.
>
>
> I am aware there will be delays on the shared workqueue, are the delays
> we are seeing considered normal?
>
>
> Is there any way to mitigate or identify where the delay is?
> I am unsure if this is a memory or filesystem subsystem issue.
>
>
> Thank you for you help.
>
> Thanks,
> Jim Baxter
>
> [1] Test Module:
> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> /*
> * Simple WQ latency monitoring
> *
> * Copyright (C) 2020 Advanced Driver Information Technology.
> */
>
> #include <linux/init.h>
> #include <linux/ktime.h>
> #include <linux/module.h>
>
> #define PERIOD_MS 100
>
> static struct delayed_work wq;
> static u64 us_save;
>
> static void wq_cb(struct work_struct *work)
> {
> u64 us = ktime_to_us(ktime_get());
> u64 us_diff = us - us_save;
> u64 us_print = 0;
>
> if (!us_save)
> goto skip_print;
>
>
> us_print = us_diff / 1000 - PERIOD_MS;
> if (us_print > 9)
> pr_crit("DELAY: %lld\n", us_print);
>
> skip_print:
> us_save = us;
> schedule_delayed_work(&wq, msecs_to_jiffies(PERIOD_MS));
> }
>
> static int latency_mon_init(void)
> {
> us_save = 0;
> INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&wq, wq_cb);
> schedule_delayed_work(&wq, msecs_to_jiffies(PERIOD_MS));
>
> return 0;
> }
>
> static void latency_mon_exit(void)
> {
> cancel_delayed_work_sync(&wq);
> pr_info("%s\n", __func__);
> }
>
> module_init(latency_mon_init);
> module_exit(latency_mon_exit);
> MODULE_AUTHOR("Eugeniu Rosca <erosca@de.adit-jv.com>");
> MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
>
>
> [2] perf trace:
> 95.22% 0.00% kworker/0:2-eve [kernel.kallsyms]
> |
> ---ret_from_fork
> kthread
> worker_thread
> |
> --95.15%--process_one_work
> |
> --94.99%--hub_event
> |
> --94.99%--usb_disconnect
> <snip>
> |
> --94.90%--invalidate_partition
> __invalidate_device
> |
> |--64.55%--invalidate_bdev
> | |
> | --64.13%--invalidate_mapping_pages
> | |
> | |--24.09%--invalidate_inode_page
> | | |
> | | --23.44%--remove_mapping
> | | |
> | | --23.20%--__remove_mapping
> | | |
> | | --21.90%--arch_local_irq_restore
> | |
> | |--22.44%--arch_local_irq_enable
> |
> --30.35%--shrink_dcache_sb
> <snip>
> |
> --30.17%--truncate_inode_pages_range
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-18 16:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-18 11:58 PROBLEM: Long Workqueue delays V2 Jim Baxter
2020-08-18 16:45 ` Jim Baxter [this message]
2020-08-19 13:12 ` Jim Baxter
2020-08-27 12:06 ` Jim Baxter
2020-09-08 15:54 ` Vlastimil Babka
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=d6845a3c-f139-fbaa-01d2-1ffa5397fd7a@mentor.com \
--to=jim_baxter@mentor.com \
--cc=Carsten.Resch@de.bosch.com \
--cc=erosca@de.adit-jv.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).