Re: [PATCH -tip V3 5/8] workqueue: Manually break affinity on hotplug for unbound pool

[Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>]

On Sat, Dec 26, 2020 at 6:16 PM Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com> wrote:
>
> Sat, 26 Dec 2020 10:51:13 +0800
> > From: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@linux.alibaba.com>
> >
> > There is possible that a per-node pool/woker's affinity is a single
> > CPU.  It can happen when the workqueue user changes the cpumask of the
> > workqueue or when wq_unbound_cpumask is changed by system adim via
> > /sys/devices/virtual/workqueue/cpumask.  And pool->attrs->cpumask
> > is workqueue's cpumask & wq_unbound_cpumask & possible_cpumask_of_the_node,
> > which can be a single CPU and makes the pool's workers to be "per cpu
> > kthread".
> >
> > And it can also happen when the cpu is the first online and has been
> > the only online cpu in pool->attrs->cpumask.  In this case, the worker
> > task cpumask is single cpu no matter what pool->attrs->cpumask since
> > commit d945b5e9f0e3 ("workqueue: Fix setting affinity of unbound worker
> > threads").
> >
> > And the scheduler won't break affinity on the "per cpu kthread" workers
> > when the CPU is going down, so we have to do it by our own.
> >
> > We do it by reusing existing restore_unbound_workers_cpumask() and rename
> > it to update_unbound_workers_cpumask().  When the number of the online
> > CPU of the pool goes from 1 to 0, we break the affinity initiatively.
> >
> > Note here, we even break the affinity for non-per-cpu-kthread workers,
> > because first, the code path is slow path which is not worth too much to
> > optimize, second, we don't need to rely on the code/conditions when the
> > scheduler forces breaking affinity for us.
> >
> > The way to break affinity is to set the workers' affinity to
> > cpu_possible_mask, so that we preserve the same behavisor when
> > the scheduler breaks affinity for us.
> >
> > Fixes: 06249738a41a ("workqueue: Manually break affinity on hotplug")
> > Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@linux.alibaba.com>
> > ---
> >  kernel/workqueue.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> >  1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
> > index 0a95ae14d46f..79cc87df0cda 100644
> > --- a/kernel/workqueue.c
> > +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
> > @@ -5019,16 +5019,18 @@ static void rebind_workers(struct worker_pool *pool)
> >  }
> >
> >  /**
> > - * restore_unbound_workers_cpumask - restore cpumask of unbound workers
> > + * update_unbound_workers_cpumask - update cpumask of unbound workers
> >   * @pool: unbound pool of interest
> > - * @cpu: the CPU which is coming up
> > + * @online: whether @cpu is coming up or going down
> > + * @cpu: the CPU which is coming up or going down
> >   *
> >   * An unbound pool may end up with a cpumask which doesn't have any online
> > - * CPUs.  When a worker of such pool get scheduled, the scheduler resets
> > - * its cpus_allowed.  If @cpu is in @pool's cpumask which didn't have any
> > - * online CPU before, cpus_allowed of all its workers should be restored.
> > + * CPUs.  We have to reset workers' cpus_allowed of such pool.  And we
> > + * restore the workers' cpus_allowed when the pool's cpumask has online
> > + * CPU.
> >   */
> > -static void restore_unbound_workers_cpumask(struct worker_pool *pool, int cpu)
> > +static void update_unbound_workers_cpumask(struct worker_pool *pool,
> > +                                        bool online, int cpu)
> >  {
> >       static cpumask_t cpumask;
> >       struct worker *worker;
> > @@ -5042,6 +5044,23 @@ static void restore_unbound_workers_cpumask(struct worker_pool *pool, int cpu)
> >
> >       cpumask_and(&cpumask, pool->attrs->cpumask, wq_online_cpumask);
> >
> > +     if (!online) {
> > +             if (cpumask_weight(&cpumask) > 0)
> > +                     return;
>
> We can apply the weight check also to the online case.
>
> > +             /*
> > +              * All unbound workers can be possibly "per cpu kthread"
> > +              * if this is the only online CPU in pool->attrs->cpumask
> > +              * from the last time it has been brought up until now.
> > +              * And the scheduler won't break affinity on the "per cpu
> > +              * kthread" workers when the CPU is going down, so we have
> > +              * to do it by our own.
> > +              */
> > +             for_each_pool_worker(worker, pool)
> > +                     WARN_ON_ONCE(set_cpus_allowed_ptr(worker->task, cpu_possible_mask) < 0);
> > +
> > +             return;
> > +     }
> > +
> >       /* as we're called from CPU_ONLINE, the following shouldn't fail */
> >       for_each_pool_worker(worker, pool)
> >               WARN_ON_ONCE(set_cpus_allowed_ptr(worker->task, &cpumask) < 0);
>
> What is the reason that pool->attrs->cpumask is not restored if it is
> not a typo, given that restore appears in the change to the above doc?

reason:

d945b5e9f0e3 ("workqueue: Fix setting affinity of unbound worker
threads").

I don't like this change either, but I don't want to touch it
now.  I will improve it late by moving handling for unbound wq/pool/worker
to a work item (out of cpu hotplug processing) and so that
we can restore pool->attrs->cpumask to workers.

The reason is also the reason I drop the patch1 of the V2 patch.

Did you see any problem with d945b5e9f0e3 except for that it does not
update the comment and it is not so efficient.

>
> BTW is there a git tree available with this patchset tucked in?
>
> > @@ -5075,7 +5094,7 @@ int workqueue_online_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
> >               if (pool->cpu == cpu)
> >                       rebind_workers(pool);
> >               else if (pool->cpu < 0)
> > -                     restore_unbound_workers_cpumask(pool, cpu);
> > +                     update_unbound_workers_cpumask(pool, true, cpu);
> >
> >               mutex_unlock(&wq_pool_attach_mutex);
> >       }
> > @@ -5090,7 +5109,9 @@ int workqueue_online_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
> >
> >  int workqueue_offline_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
> >  {
> > +     struct worker_pool *pool;
> >       struct workqueue_struct *wq;
> > +     int pi;
> >
> >       /* unbinding per-cpu workers should happen on the local CPU */
> >       if (WARN_ON(cpu != smp_processor_id()))
> > @@ -5098,9 +5119,20 @@ int workqueue_offline_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
> >
> >       unbind_workers(cpu);
> >
> > -     /* update NUMA affinity of unbound workqueues */
> >       mutex_lock(&wq_pool_mutex);
> >       cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, wq_online_cpumask);
> > +
> > +     /* update CPU affinity of workers of unbound pools */
> > +     for_each_pool(pool, pi) {
> > +             mutex_lock(&wq_pool_attach_mutex);
> > +
> > +             if (pool->cpu < 0)
> > +                     update_unbound_workers_cpumask(pool, false, cpu);
> > +
> > +             mutex_unlock(&wq_pool_attach_mutex);
> > +     }
> > +
> > +     /* update NUMA affinity of unbound workqueues */
> >       list_for_each_entry(wq, &workqueues, list)
> >               wq_update_unbound_numa(wq, cpu);
> >       mutex_unlock(&wq_pool_mutex);
> > --
> > 2.19.1.6.gb485710b