mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: imran.f.khan@oracle.com
To: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	john.stultz@linaro.org, sboyd@kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Query about timer wheel API
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 01:20:48 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <801e569c-4f86-4bb5-a255-b861b86cb773@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241223125202.407-1-hdanton@sina.com>

Hello Hillf,
On 23/12/2024 11:51 pm, Hillf Danton wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 11:14:21 +1100 imran.f.khan@oracle.com
>>
>> Recently we have come across some bugs in the RDS code, where a delayed
>> work was being queued on an offlined CPU and as a result of that the
> 
> Such a queue could not happen given irq disabled in queue_delayed_work_on().
> Did you see it upstream?
> 
You mean upstream RDS or upstream workqueue ? For RDS I need to check, but with 
upstream v6.6 kernel, I was able to submit a delayed work to an offlined CPU.
The delayed work would never happen and I can see corresponding timer in timer
list of offlined  CPU (using crash). 
Once the CPU is brought back online, depending on the workload the work handler
gets executed.

I used following test module:

===============

#include <linux/module.h>
#include <linux/types.h>
#include <linux/kernel.h>
#include <linux/workqueue.h>
#include <linux/completion.h>
#include <linux/delay.h>
#include <linux/slab.h>
#include <linux/jiffies.h>

#define TIMEOUT 1 /* test timeout in secs */
#define NUM_WORK_ITEMS 1 /* number of work items to submit */


static DEFINE_MUTEX(mutex);

static DEFINE_MUTEX(dwork_func_mutex);

static void delayed_work_func(struct work_struct *data)
{
	int cpu;
	mutex_lock(&dwork_func_mutex);
	cpu = get_cpu();
	pr_err("%s invoked for work: 0x%px on cpu#%d \n", __func__, data, cpu);
	put_cpu();
	mutex_unlock(&dwork_func_mutex);
}

static int param_set_queue_work_on_cpu(const char *val, const struct kernel_param *kp)
{
	int cpu, this_cpu, i;
	struct delayed_work *dwork = NULL;

	if (!mutex_trylock(&mutex))
		return -EBUSY;

	cpu = simple_strtoul(val, NULL, 0);
	/*if (!cpu_present(cpu)) 
		return -EINVAL;*/

	for (i = 0; i < NUM_WORK_ITEMS; i++) {
		dwork = kzalloc(sizeof(struct delayed_work), GFP_KERNEL);
		if(dwork) {
			this_cpu = get_cpu();
			INIT_DELAYED_WORK(dwork, delayed_work_func);
			queue_delayed_work_on(cpu, system_wq, dwork, msecs_to_jiffies(10000));
			pr_err("Submitted dwork 0x%px on %s cpu#%d \n", dwork, cpu_online(cpu)?"online":"offline", cpu);
			put_cpu();
		}

	}
	mutex_unlock(&mutex);
	return 0;
}

module_param_call(queue_work_on_cpu, param_set_queue_work_on_cpu, NULL, NULL, 0600);

static int __init workqueue_study_init(void)
{
	pr_err("module_init \n");
	
	return 0;
}

static void workqueue_study_exit(void)
{
	pr_err("module_exit \n");
}

MODULE_AUTHOR("Imran Khan <imran.eie.85@gmail.com>");
MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Workqueue study");
MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");

module_init(workqueue_study_init);
module_exit(workqueue_study_exit);

===========

This module gives an interface at:

/sys/module/<module name>/params/queue_work_on_cpu

Writing X there would submit a delayed_work (delay 10 secs)
to CPU X.

We can see if CPU X is online, submitted work gets executed
after around 10 secs. But if CPU X is offline, the submitted
work handler does not get fired unless the CPU has been brought
back online.

Thanks,
Imran
>> underlying timer was not firing, which in turn meant that the work was
>> never able to make it to the intended worker_pool.


  reply	other threads:[~2024-12-23 14:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-12-23  0:14 imran.f.khan
2024-12-23 12:51 ` Hillf Danton
2024-12-23 14:20   ` imran.f.khan [this message]
2024-12-24 10:41     ` Hillf Danton
2024-12-24 12:41       ` imran.f.khan
2024-12-25 11:01         ` Hillf Danton
2024-12-26 13:07           ` imran.f.khan
2024-12-27 10:30             ` Hillf Danton
2025-01-15 10:32 ` Thomas Gleixner
2025-01-15 13:48   ` imran.f.khan

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=801e569c-4f86-4bb5-a255-b861b86cb773@oracle.com \
    --to=imran.f.khan@oracle.com \
    --cc=hdanton@sina.com \
    --cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tj@kernel.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®