From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Cc: 0day robot <lkp@intel.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
lkp@lists.01.org, kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] workqueue: Use private WQ for schedule_on_each_cpu() API
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2022 12:29:01 -1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yha1LeX4OK3cLCV5@slm.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9a883d72-ea7d-1936-93e6-5c2a290509d4@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 07:26:30AM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > The patch seems pretty wrong. What's problematic is system workqueue flushes
> > (which flushes the entire workqueue), not work item flushes.
>
> Why? My understanding is that
>
> flushing a workqueue waits for completion of all work items in that workqueue
>
> flushing a work item waits for for completion of that work item using
> a workqueue specified as of queue_work()
>
> and
>
> if a work item in some workqueue is blocked by other work in that workqueue
> (e.g. max_active limit, work items on that workqueue and locks they need),
> it has a risk of deadlock
>
> . Then, how can flushing a work item using system-wide workqueues be free of deadlock risk?
> Isn't it just "unlikely to deadlock" rather than "impossible to deadlock"?
If we're jamming system_wq with a combination of work items which need more
than max_active to make forward progress, we're stuck regardless of flushes.
What's needed at that point is increasing max_active (or something along
that line).
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-23 22:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-21 8:33 [workqueue] 29bd199e4e: WARNING:possible_circular_locking_dependency_detected kernel test robot
2022-02-21 10:38 ` [PATCH] workqueue: Use private WQ for schedule_on_each_cpu() API Tetsuo Handa
2022-02-22 17:29 ` Tejun Heo
2022-02-23 0:57 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-02-23 21:33 ` Tejun Heo
2022-02-23 22:26 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-02-23 22:29 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2022-02-28 14:03 ` [PATCH v3] workqueue: Warn flushing of kernel-global workqueues Tetsuo Handa
2022-02-28 18:42 ` Tejun Heo
2022-03-17 22:25 ` Tetsuo Handa
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=Yha1LeX4OK3cLCV5@slm.duckdns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=lkp@lists.01.org \
--cc=oliver.sang@intel.com \
--cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
/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®