All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: jiangshanlai@gmail.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Naohiro.Aota@wdc.com,
	kernel-team@meta.com, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 06/10] workqueue: RCU protect wq->dfl_pwq and implement accessors for it
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 07:05:59 -1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240125170628.2017784-7-tj@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240125170628.2017784-1-tj@kernel.org>

wq->cpu_pwq is RCU protected but wq->dfl_pwq isn't. This is okay because
currently wq->dfl_pwq is used only accessed to install it into wq->cpu_pwq
which doesn't require RCU access. However, we want to be able to access
wq->dfl_pwq under RCU in the future to access its __pod_cpumask and the code
can be made easier to read by making the two pwq fields behave in the same
way.

- Make wq->dfl_pwq RCU protected.

- Add unbound_pwq_slot() and unbound_pwq() which can access both ->dfl_pwq
  and ->cpu_pwq. The former returns the double pointer that can be used
  access and update the pwqs. The latter performs locking check and
  dereferences the double pointer.

- pwq accesses and updates are converted to use unbound_pwq[_slot]().

Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
---
 kernel/workqueue.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index bfb6e951852a..1bca0a4ab9d1 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -304,7 +304,7 @@ struct workqueue_struct {
 	int			saved_max_active; /* WQ: saved max_active */
 
 	struct workqueue_attrs	*unbound_attrs;	/* PW: only for unbound wqs */
-	struct pool_workqueue	*dfl_pwq;	/* PW: only for unbound wqs */
+	struct pool_workqueue __rcu *dfl_pwq;   /* PW: only for unbound wqs */
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_SYSFS
 	struct wq_device	*wq_dev;	/* I: for sysfs interface */
@@ -635,6 +635,23 @@ static int worker_pool_assign_id(struct worker_pool *pool)
 	return ret;
 }
 
+static struct pool_workqueue __rcu **
+unbound_pwq_slot(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int cpu)
+{
+       if (cpu >= 0)
+               return per_cpu_ptr(wq->cpu_pwq, cpu);
+       else
+               return &wq->dfl_pwq;
+}
+
+/* @cpu < 0 for dfl_pwq */
+static struct pool_workqueue *unbound_pwq(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int cpu)
+{
+	return rcu_dereference_check(*unbound_pwq_slot(wq, cpu),
+				     lockdep_is_held(&wq_pool_mutex) ||
+				     lockdep_is_held(&wq->mutex));
+}
+
 static unsigned int work_color_to_flags(int color)
 {
 	return color << WORK_STRUCT_COLOR_SHIFT;
@@ -4325,10 +4342,11 @@ static void wq_calc_pod_cpumask(struct workqueue_attrs *attrs, int cpu,
 				"possible intersect\n");
 }
 
-/* install @pwq into @wq's cpu_pwq and return the old pwq */
+/* install @pwq into @wq and return the old pwq, @cpu < 0 for dfl_pwq */
 static struct pool_workqueue *install_unbound_pwq(struct workqueue_struct *wq,
 					int cpu, struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
 {
+	struct pool_workqueue __rcu **slot = unbound_pwq_slot(wq, cpu);
 	struct pool_workqueue *old_pwq;
 
 	lockdep_assert_held(&wq_pool_mutex);
@@ -4337,8 +4355,8 @@ static struct pool_workqueue *install_unbound_pwq(struct workqueue_struct *wq,
 	/* link_pwq() can handle duplicate calls */
 	link_pwq(pwq);
 
-	old_pwq = rcu_access_pointer(*per_cpu_ptr(wq->cpu_pwq, cpu));
-	rcu_assign_pointer(*per_cpu_ptr(wq->cpu_pwq, cpu), pwq);
+	old_pwq = rcu_access_pointer(*slot);
+	rcu_assign_pointer(*slot, pwq);
 	return old_pwq;
 }
 
@@ -4438,14 +4456,11 @@ static void apply_wqattrs_commit(struct apply_wqattrs_ctx *ctx)
 
 	copy_workqueue_attrs(ctx->wq->unbound_attrs, ctx->attrs);
 
-	/* save the previous pwq and install the new one */
+	/* save the previous pwqs and install the new ones */
 	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu)
 		ctx->pwq_tbl[cpu] = install_unbound_pwq(ctx->wq, cpu,
 							ctx->pwq_tbl[cpu]);
-
-	/* @dfl_pwq might not have been used, ensure it's linked */
-	link_pwq(ctx->dfl_pwq);
-	swap(ctx->wq->dfl_pwq, ctx->dfl_pwq);
+	ctx->dfl_pwq = install_unbound_pwq(ctx->wq, -1, ctx->dfl_pwq);
 
 	mutex_unlock(&ctx->wq->mutex);
 }
@@ -4555,9 +4570,7 @@ static void wq_update_pod(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int cpu,
 
 	/* nothing to do if the target cpumask matches the current pwq */
 	wq_calc_pod_cpumask(target_attrs, cpu, off_cpu);
-	pwq = rcu_dereference_protected(*per_cpu_ptr(wq->cpu_pwq, cpu),
-					lockdep_is_held(&wq_pool_mutex));
-	if (wqattrs_equal(target_attrs, pwq->pool->attrs))
+	if (wqattrs_equal(target_attrs, unbound_pwq(wq, cpu)->pool->attrs))
 		return;
 
 	/* create a new pwq */
@@ -4575,10 +4588,11 @@ static void wq_update_pod(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int cpu,
 
 use_dfl_pwq:
 	mutex_lock(&wq->mutex);
-	raw_spin_lock_irq(&wq->dfl_pwq->pool->lock);
-	get_pwq(wq->dfl_pwq);
-	raw_spin_unlock_irq(&wq->dfl_pwq->pool->lock);
-	old_pwq = install_unbound_pwq(wq, cpu, wq->dfl_pwq);
+	pwq = unbound_pwq(wq, -1);
+	raw_spin_lock_irq(&pwq->pool->lock);
+	get_pwq(pwq);
+	raw_spin_unlock_irq(&pwq->pool->lock);
+	old_pwq = install_unbound_pwq(wq, cpu, pwq);
 out_unlock:
 	mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex);
 	put_pwq_unlocked(old_pwq);
@@ -4616,10 +4630,13 @@ static int alloc_and_link_pwqs(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
 
 	cpus_read_lock();
 	if (wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED) {
+		struct pool_workqueue *dfl_pwq;
+
 		ret = apply_workqueue_attrs(wq, ordered_wq_attrs[highpri]);
 		/* there should only be single pwq for ordering guarantee */
-		WARN(!ret && (wq->pwqs.next != &wq->dfl_pwq->pwqs_node ||
-			      wq->pwqs.prev != &wq->dfl_pwq->pwqs_node),
+		dfl_pwq = rcu_access_pointer(wq->dfl_pwq);
+		WARN(!ret && (wq->pwqs.next != &dfl_pwq->pwqs_node ||
+			      wq->pwqs.prev != &dfl_pwq->pwqs_node),
 		     "ordering guarantee broken for workqueue %s\n", wq->name);
 	} else {
 		ret = apply_workqueue_attrs(wq, unbound_std_wq_attrs[highpri]);
@@ -4853,7 +4870,7 @@ static bool pwq_busy(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
 		if (pwq->nr_in_flight[i])
 			return true;
 
-	if ((pwq != pwq->wq->dfl_pwq) && (pwq->refcnt > 1))
+	if ((pwq != rcu_access_pointer(pwq->wq->dfl_pwq)) && (pwq->refcnt > 1))
 		return true;
 	if (!pwq_is_empty(pwq))
 		return true;
@@ -4937,13 +4954,12 @@ void destroy_workqueue(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
 	rcu_read_lock();
 
 	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
-		pwq = rcu_access_pointer(*per_cpu_ptr(wq->cpu_pwq, cpu));
-		RCU_INIT_POINTER(*per_cpu_ptr(wq->cpu_pwq, cpu), NULL);
-		put_pwq_unlocked(pwq);
+		put_pwq_unlocked(unbound_pwq(wq, cpu));
+		RCU_INIT_POINTER(*unbound_pwq_slot(wq, cpu), NULL);
 	}
 
-	put_pwq_unlocked(wq->dfl_pwq);
-	wq->dfl_pwq = NULL;
+	put_pwq_unlocked(unbound_pwq(wq, -1));
+	RCU_INIT_POINTER(*unbound_pwq_slot(wq, -1), NULL);
 
 	rcu_read_unlock();
 }
-- 
2.43.0


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-01-25 17:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-01-25 17:05 [PATCHSET v3 wq/for-6.9] workqueue: Implement system-wide max_active for unbound workqueues Tejun Heo
2024-01-25 17:05 ` [PATCH 01/10] workqueue: Move pwq->max_active to wq->max_active Tejun Heo
2024-01-25 17:05 ` [PATCH 02/10] workqueue: Factor out pwq_is_empty() Tejun Heo
2024-01-25 17:05 ` [PATCH 03/10] workqueue: Replace pwq_activate_inactive_work() with [__]pwq_activate_work() Tejun Heo
2024-01-25 17:05 ` [PATCH 04/10] workqueue: Move nr_active handling into helpers Tejun Heo
2024-01-25 17:05 ` [PATCH 05/10] workqueue: Make wq_adjust_max_active() round-robin pwqs while activating Tejun Heo
2024-01-25 17:05 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2024-01-25 17:06 ` [PATCH 07/10] workqueue: Move pwq_dec_nr_in_flight() to the end of work item handling Tejun Heo
2024-01-25 17:06 ` [PATCH 08/10] workqueue: Introduce struct wq_node_nr_active Tejun Heo
2024-01-29 16:02   ` Lai Jiangshan
2024-01-29 18:14     ` [PATCH v4 " Tejun Heo
2024-01-30 18:00       ` Nathan Chancellor
2024-01-31  4:04         ` Tejun Heo
2024-01-25 17:06 ` [PATCH 09/10] workqueue: Implement system-wide nr_active enforcement for unbound workqueues Tejun Heo
2024-01-29 16:00   ` Lai Jiangshan
2024-01-29 18:14     ` [PATCH v4 " Tejun Heo
2024-01-30 22:30       ` Marek Szyprowski
2024-01-31  4:02         ` Tejun Heo
2024-01-31  4:12           ` Nathan Chancellor
2024-01-31  4:13             ` Tejun Heo
2024-01-31  4:20               ` Nathan Chancellor
2024-01-31  4:24                 ` Tejun Heo
2024-01-31  4:42                   ` Nathan Chancellor
2024-01-31  5:01                     ` Tejun Heo
2024-01-31  7:45                       ` Marek Szyprowski
2024-01-31 21:52                   ` Mark Brown
2024-01-31  5:25           ` [PATCH wq/for-6.9] workqueue: Avoid premature init of wq->node_nr_active[].max Tejun Heo
2024-01-25 17:06 ` [PATCH 10/10] tools/workqueue/wq_dump.py: Add node_nr/max_active dump Tejun Heo
2024-01-29 16:07 ` [PATCHSET v3 wq/for-6.9] workqueue: Implement system-wide max_active for unbound workqueues Lai Jiangshan
2024-01-29 18:16   ` Tejun Heo

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=20240125170628.2017784-7-tj@kernel.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=Naohiro.Aota@wdc.com \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.