mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
	Michal Koutny <mkoutny@suse.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 5/5] workqueue: Print backtraces from CPUs with hung CPU bound workqueues
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2023 15:26:36 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y90ZnFNT+4XS2PlH@alley> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y9xLAdc9ODyEO+RQ@slm.duckdns.org>

Hello,

On Thu 2023-02-02 13:45:05, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > +static bool show_pool_suspicious_workers(struct worker_pool *pool, bool shown_title)
> > +{
> > +	bool shown_any = false;
> > +	struct worker *worker;
> > +	unsigned long flags;
> > +	int bkt;
> > +
> > +	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pool->lock, flags);
> > +
> > +	if (pool->cpu < 0)
> > +		goto out;
> 
> This can be tested before grabbling the lock.

I see.

> > +	if (!per_cpu(wq_watchdog_hung_cpu, pool->cpu))
> > +		goto out;
> 
> Given that the state is per-pool, would it make sense to mark this on the
> pool instead?

Makes sense. I think that I started with the per-CPU variable before
I sorted my thoughts about what backtraces were useful ;-)

> > +	if (list_empty(&pool->worklist))
> > +		goto out;
> 
> This condition isn't really necessary, right?

IMHO, it should be there. The watchdog reports the problem only when
there  are pending work items, see

		if (list_empty(&pool->worklist))
			continue;

in wq_watchdog_timer_fn().

My understanding is that it is OK to process work items longer
time when they are sleeping and waiting for something.

Best Regards,
Petr

      reply	other threads:[~2023-02-03 14:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-02-01 13:45 [RFC 0/5] workqueue: Debugging improvements Petr Mladek
2023-02-01 13:45 ` [RFC 1/5] workqueue: Fix hung time report of worker pools Petr Mladek
2023-02-01 13:45 ` [RFC 2/5] workqueue: Warn when a new worker could not be created Petr Mladek
2023-02-02 23:30   ` Tejun Heo
2023-02-03 14:10     ` Petr Mladek
2023-02-03 19:29       ` Tejun Heo
2023-02-15 18:02   ` Michal Koutný
2023-02-16  9:43     ` Petr Mladek
2023-02-01 13:45 ` [RFC 3/5] workqueue: Interrupted create_worker() is not a repeated event Petr Mladek
2023-02-01 13:45 ` [RFC 4/5] workqueue: Warn when a rescuer could not be created Petr Mladek
2023-02-01 13:45 ` [RFC 5/5] workqueue: Print backtraces from CPUs with hung CPU bound workqueues Petr Mladek
2023-02-02 23:45   ` Tejun Heo
2023-02-03 14:26     ` Petr Mladek [this message]

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=Y90ZnFNT+4XS2PlH@alley \
    --to=pmladek@suse.com \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
    --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®