mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Qian Cai <cai@redhat.com>,
	Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@linux.alibaba.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH -tip V4 2/8] workqueue: set pool->attr->cpumask to workers when cpu online
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 23:26:32 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210111152638.2417-3-jiangshanlai@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210111152638.2417-1-jiangshanlai@gmail.com>

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

The commit d945b5e9f0e("workqueue: Fix setting affinity of unbound worker
threads") fixed a problem of set_cpus_allowed_ptr() with online&!active
cpumasks (more than one CPUs) when restore_unbound_workers_cpumask() in
online callback.

But now the new online callback for unbound workqueue is called later
than sched_cpu_activate().  So the cpu is set in cpu_active_mask and
set_cpus_allowed_ptr() with pool->attrs->cpumask in the code won't
cause such warning any more.

The said commit also left comments outdated and causes confusing.
It is better to change the code back.

Cc: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>
Reported-by: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Tested-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@linux.alibaba.com>
---
 kernel/workqueue.c | 6 +++++-
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index d7bdb7885e55..38628e2a622c 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -5039,11 +5039,15 @@ static void restore_unbound_workers_cpumask(struct worker_pool *pool, int cpu)
 	if (!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, pool->attrs->cpumask))
 		return;
 
+	/* is @cpu the only online CPU? */
 	cpumask_and(&cpumask, pool->attrs->cpumask, cpu_online_mask);
+	if (cpumask_weight(&cpumask) != 1)
+		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);
+		WARN_ON_ONCE(set_cpus_allowed_ptr(worker->task,
+						  pool->attrs->cpumask) < 0);
 }
 
 int workqueue_prepare_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
-- 
2.19.1.6.gb485710b


  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-01-11 14:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-01-11 15:26 [PATCH -tip V4 0/8] workqueue: break affinity initiatively Lai Jiangshan
2021-01-11 15:26 ` [PATCH -tip V4 1/8] workqueue: split cpuhotplug callbacks for unbound workqueue Lai Jiangshan
2021-01-11 15:26 ` Lai Jiangshan [this message]
2021-01-11 15:26 ` [PATCH -tip V4 3/8] workqueue: use cpu_possible_mask instead of cpu_active_mask to break affinity Lai Jiangshan
2021-01-22 17:41   ` [tip: sched/urgent] workqueue: Use " tip-bot2 for Lai Jiangshan
2021-01-11 15:26 ` [PATCH -tip V4 4/8] workqueue: Manually break affinity on pool detachment Lai Jiangshan
2021-01-11 15:26 ` [PATCH -tip V4 5/8] workqueue: introduce wq_unbound_online_cpumask Lai Jiangshan
2021-01-11 15:26 ` [PATCH -tip V4 6/8] workqueue: use wq_unbound_online_cpumask in restore_unbound_workers_cpumask() Lai Jiangshan
2021-01-11 15:26 ` [PATCH -tip V4 7/8] workqueue: Manually break affinity on hotplug for unbound pool Lai Jiangshan
2021-01-11 15:26 ` [PATCH -tip V4 8/8] workqueue: Fix affinity of kworkers when attaching into pool Lai Jiangshan

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=20210111152638.2417-3-jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --to=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=cai@redhat.com \
    --cc=hdanton@sina.com \
    --cc=laijs@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®