From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
Linux-RT <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] locking/rwbase: Mitigate indefinite writer starvation
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2023 11:00:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230127110022.w3ztzcho45tpo6za@techsingularity.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230120140847.4pjqf3oinemokcyp@techsingularity.net>
On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 02:08:47PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> rw_semaphore and rwlock are explicitly unfair to writers in the presense
> of readers by design with a PREEMPT_RT configuration. Commit 943f0edb754f
> ("locking/rt: Add base code for RT rw_semaphore and rwlock") notes;
>
> The implementation is writer unfair, as it is not feasible to do
> priority inheritance on multiple readers, but experience has shown
> that real-time workloads are not the typical workloads which are
> sensitive to writer starvation.
>
> While atypical, it's also trivial to block writers with PREEMPT_RT
> indefinitely without ever making forward progress. Since LTP-20220121,
> the dio_truncate test case went from having 1 reader to having 16 readers
> and the number of readers is sufficient to prevent the down_write ever
> succeeding while readers exist. Eventually the test is killed after 30
> minutes as a failure.
>
> dio_truncate is not a realtime application but indefinite writer starvation
> is undesirable. The test case has one writer appending and truncating files
> A and B while multiple readers read file A. The readers and writer are
> contending for one file's inode lock which never succeeds as the readers
> keep reading until the writer is done which never happens.
>
> This patch records a timestamp when the first writer is blocked. DL /
> RT tasks can continue to take the lock for read as long as readers exist
> indefinitely. Other readers can acquire the read lock unless a writer
> has been blocked for a minimum of 4ms. This is sufficient to allow the
> dio_truncate test case to complete within the 30 minutes timeout.
>
> [bigeasy@linutronix.de: Fix overflow, close race against reader, match rwsem
> timeouts, better rt_task handling, simplification]
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
> Reviewed-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Yay/nay?
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-27 11:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-20 14:08 Mel Gorman
2023-01-27 11:00 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2023-02-06 14:30 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-02-08 20:19 ` Mel Gorman
2023-02-15 16:02 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
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=20230127110022.w3ztzcho45tpo6za@techsingularity.net \
--to=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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®