From: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
To: Nam Cao <namcao@linutronix.de>,
Florian Bezdeka <florian.bezdeka@siemens.com>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>,
Clark Williams <clrkwllms@kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org,
Joe Damato <jdamato@fastly.com>,
Martin Karsten <mkarsten@uwaterloo.ca>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Josh Don <joshdon@google.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Xi Wang <xii@google.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Chengming Zhou <chengming.zhou@linux.dev>,
Chuyi Zhou <zhouchuyi@bytedance.com>,
Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>,
Andreas Ziegler <ziegler.andreas@siemens.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] eventpoll: Fix priority inversion problem
Date: Mon, 19 May 2025 16:22:40 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xhsmhbjroade7.mognet@vschneid-thinkpadt14sgen2i.remote.csb> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250519094543.m4bNJP6X@linutronix.de>
On 19/05/25 11:45, Nam Cao wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 11:25:51AM +0200, Florian Bezdeka wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> sorry for top-posting, but I think it makes sense in this case as I'm
>> trying to merge different workstreams, likely working on the same
>> problem showing up in different colors.
>>
>> Main goal is to make everybody aware of the other stream / patch
>> series.
>>
>> We have colleagues from Bytedance working on non-RT performance
>> optimizations related to CONFIG_CFS_BANDWIDTH at [1].
>>
>> This series came to light while searching for a solution for a RT
>> lockup, reported at [2].
>>
>> We heavily tested [1] during the last month on RT and can report
>> success now. In our tests we saw read-lock holder preemption only
>> within the epoll interface. It might be that [1] fixes more potential
>> issues in this regard.
>>
>> Today [3] (= the patch I'm replying to, see below) got posted.
>> Linutronix reworking the epoll infrastructure.
>>
>> I would love to learn how/if the combination, basically [1] and [3] fit
>> together.
>
> [1] fixes stall problem involving rw semaphore which epoll uses, but it
> doesn't fix the possible priority inversion with epoll
>
> [3] fixes priority inversion problem with epoll by stop using rw semaphore,
> but it doesn't do anything about rw semaphore
>
> So I propose we keep both.
>
FWIW I'm thinking the same.
[1] fixes the CFS throttling circular dependency on RT but also improves
tail latency when CFS throttling is in use (so not just for RT).
[3] is specific to epoll but gets rid of the rwsem which is a win overall.
I need to go get my reviewing hat back on and stare at both...
> Best regards,
> Nam
>
>> My understanding right now is, that [1] fixes a CFS issue, throttling
>> while holding a lock is not ideal on !RT - but might cause a critical
>> lockup on RT - while [3] is addressing a similar (RT) problem in epoll.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Florian
>>
>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250409120746.635476-1-ziqianlu@bytedance.com/
>> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rt-users/xhsmhttqvnall.mognet@vschneid.remote.csb/
>> [3] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rt-users/20250519074016.3337326-1-namcao@linutronix.de/T/#u
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-19 14:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-19 7:40 Nam Cao
2025-05-19 9:25 ` Florian Bezdeka
2025-05-19 9:45 ` Nam Cao
2025-05-19 14:22 ` Valentin Schneider [this message]
2025-05-21 14:25 ` Valentin Schneider
2025-05-21 14:53 ` Nam Cao
2025-05-21 15:37 ` Valentin Schneider
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=xhsmhbjroade7.mognet@vschneid-thinkpadt14sgen2i.remote.csb \
--to=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=chengming.zhou@linux.dev \
--cc=clrkwllms@kernel.org \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=florian.bezdeka@siemens.com \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
--cc=jdamato@fastly.com \
--cc=john.ogness@linutronix.de \
--cc=joshdon@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mkarsten@uwaterloo.ca \
--cc=namcao@linutronix.de \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=xii@google.com \
--cc=zhouchuyi@bytedance.com \
--cc=ziegler.andreas@siemens.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®