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>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH -tip V4 4/8] workqueue: Manually break affinity on pool detachment
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 23:26:34 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210111152638.2417-5-jiangshanlai@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210111152638.2417-1-jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
From: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@linux.alibaba.com>
The pool->attrs->cpumask might be a single CPU and it may go
down after detachment, and the scheduler won't force to break
affinity for us since it is a per-cpu-ktrhead. So we have to
do it on our own and unbind this worker which can't be unbound
by workqueue_offline_cpu() since it doesn't belong to any pool
after detachment. Do it unconditionally for there is no harm
to break affinity for non-per-cpu-ktrhead and we don't need to
rely on the scheduler's policy on when to break affinity.
Fixes: 06249738a41a ("workqueue: Manually break affinity on hotplug")
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 | 13 +++++++++++++
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 3e92bc4f8a36..aed08eddeb83 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -1888,6 +1888,19 @@ static void worker_detach_from_pool(struct worker *worker)
if (list_empty(&pool->workers))
detach_completion = pool->detach_completion;
+
+ /*
+ * The pool->attrs->cpumask might be a single CPU and it may go
+ * down after detachment, and the scheduler won't force to break
+ * affinity for us since it is a per-cpu-ktrhead. So we have to
+ * do it on our own and unbind this worker which can't be unbound
+ * by workqueue_offline_cpu() since it doesn't belong to any pool
+ * after detachment. Do it unconditionally for there is no harm
+ * to break affinity for non-per-cpu-ktrhead and we don't need to
+ * rely on the scheduler's policy on when to break affinity.
+ */
+ set_cpus_allowed_ptr(worker->task, cpu_possible_mask);
+
mutex_unlock(&wq_pool_attach_mutex);
/* clear leftover flags without pool->lock after it is detached */
--
2.19.1.6.gb485710b
next prev 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 ` [PATCH -tip V4 2/8] workqueue: set pool->attr->cpumask to workers when cpu online Lai Jiangshan
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 ` Lai Jiangshan [this message]
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=20210111152638.2417-5-jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--to=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=bristot@redhat.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®