From: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
To: Chen Ridong <chenridong@huaweicloud.com>
Cc: "Tejun Heo" <tj@kernel.org>,
"Johannes Weiner" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
"Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>,
"Roman Gushchin" <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
"Kuniyuki Iwashima" <kuniyu@google.com>,
"Daniel Sedlak" <daniel.sedlak@cdn77.com>,
"Meta kernel team" <kernel-team@meta.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] cgroup: add lockless fast-path checks to cgroup_file_notify()
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2026 09:00:10 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aaXB0A7eTbyZ4wA_@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aaW2feETIF7I65i1@linux.dev>
On Mon, Mar 02, 2026 at 08:14:05AM -0800, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> Hi Chen, thanks for taking a look.
>
> On Mon, Mar 02, 2026 at 09:50:53AM +0800, Chen Ridong wrote:
> >
[...]
> > > + last = READ_ONCE(cfile->notified_at);
> > > + if (time_before_eq(jiffies, last + CGROUP_FILE_NOTIFY_MIN_INTV))
> > > + return;
> > > +
> >
> > Previously, if a notification arrived within the rate-limit window, we would
> > still call timer_reduce(&cfile->notify_timer, next) to schedule a deferred
> > notification.
> >
> > With this change, returning early here bypasses that timer scheduling entirely.
> > Does this risk missing notifications that would have been delivered by the timer?
> >
>
> You are indeed right that this can cause missed notifications. After giving some
> thought I think the lockless check-and-return can be pretty much simplified to
> timer_pending() check. If timer is active, just do nothing and the notification
> will be delivered eventually.
>
> I will send the updated version soon. Any comments on the other two patches?
>
Something like the following:
From 598199723b50813b015393122796f6775eee02d7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2026 04:01:28 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] cgroup: add lockless fast-path checks to cgroup_file_notify()
Add two lockless checks before acquiring the lock:
1. READ_ONCE(cfile->kn) NULL check to skip torn-down files.
2. timer_pending() check to skip when a deferred notification
timer is already armed.
Both checks have safe error directions -- a stale read can only
cause unnecessary lock acquisition, never a missed notification.
Annotate cfile->kn write sites with WRITE_ONCE() to pair with the
lockless reader.
Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
Reported-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
---
kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c | 10 ++++++++--
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c b/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c
index 2b298a2cf206..6e816d27ee25 100644
--- a/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c
+++ b/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c
@@ -1749,7 +1749,7 @@ static void cgroup_rm_file(struct cgroup *cgrp, const struct cftype *cft)
struct cgroup_file *cfile = (void *)css + cft->file_offset;
spin_lock_irq(&cgroup_file_kn_lock);
- cfile->kn = NULL;
+ WRITE_ONCE(cfile->kn, NULL);
spin_unlock_irq(&cgroup_file_kn_lock);
timer_delete_sync(&cfile->notify_timer);
@@ -4430,7 +4430,7 @@ static int cgroup_add_file(struct cgroup_subsys_state *css, struct cgroup *cgrp,
timer_setup(&cfile->notify_timer, cgroup_file_notify_timer, 0);
spin_lock_irq(&cgroup_file_kn_lock);
- cfile->kn = kn;
+ WRITE_ONCE(cfile->kn, kn);
spin_unlock_irq(&cgroup_file_kn_lock);
}
@@ -4689,6 +4689,12 @@ void cgroup_file_notify(struct cgroup_file *cfile)
unsigned long flags;
struct kernfs_node *kn = NULL;
+ if (!READ_ONCE(cfile->kn))
+ return;
+
+ if (timer_pending(&cfile->notify_timer))
+ return;
+
spin_lock_irqsave(&cgroup_file_kn_lock, flags);
if (cfile->kn) {
unsigned long last = cfile->notified_at;
--
2.47.3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-02 17:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-28 14:20 [PATCH 0/3] cgroup: improve cgroup_file_notify() scalability Shakeel Butt
2026-02-28 14:20 ` [PATCH 1/3] cgroup: reduce cgroup_file_kn_lock hold time in cgroup_file_notify() Shakeel Butt
2026-02-28 14:20 ` [PATCH 2/3] cgroup: add lockless fast-path checks to cgroup_file_notify() Shakeel Butt
2026-03-02 1:50 ` Chen Ridong
2026-03-02 16:14 ` Shakeel Butt
2026-03-02 17:00 ` Shakeel Butt [this message]
2026-03-03 3:18 ` Chen Ridong
2026-03-03 4:01 ` Shakeel Butt
2026-03-05 7:01 ` Chen Ridong
2026-03-03 3:08 ` Chen Ridong
2026-02-28 14:20 ` [PATCH 3/3] cgroup: replace global cgroup_file_kn_lock with per-cgroup_file lock Shakeel Butt
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=aaXB0A7eTbyZ4wA_@linux.dev \
--to=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chenridong@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=daniel.sedlak@cdn77.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=kuniyu@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--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 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.