From: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, marco.crivellari@suse.com,
frederic@kernel.org, bigeasy@linutronix.de,
Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>,
kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] workqueue: park kicked worker on pool->kicked_list
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2026 07:40:43 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aiLSOAcx_v1rrMdD@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aiE8RZCHvpqh_V2H@slm.duckdns.org>
Hello Tejun,
On Wed, Jun 03, 2026 at 10:50:13PM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 03, 2026 at 06:40:08AM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote:
> > kick_pool() picks an idle worker and wakes it, but leaves it WORKER_IDLE
> > on pool->idle_list until the woken kthread schedules in and runs
> > worker_leave_idle(). idle_cull_fn() only checks WORKER_IDLE, not the
>
> A lot of the existing comments in the file are double spaced but let's not
> do that anymore. Please use single space to separate sentences in desc and
> comments.
I suppose you mean double space after double space? Sorry, I will avoid
it.
> > task state, so a kicked-but-not-yet-scheduled worker is still a valid
> > cull victim -- the cull can reap it before it consumes the just-enqueued
> > work, stranding the item. The window is narrow today but later patches
> > in this series defer the wakeup outside pool->lock, widening it.
>
> Have you actually reproduced this?
No -- not without artificially changing the timeout in the kernel. So far this
is a theoretical race window rather than something I've hit in
practice; it was flagged as a critical issue by sashiko:
https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260526-fastwake-v1-0-e69ad86923e6%40debian.org
The only way I could get it to actually strand an item was by shrinking
IDLE_WORKER_TIMEOUT 150,000x (300s -> 2ms), so that a worker counts as
"timed out" almost immediately.
> Idle culling never dips below 2 idle workers. Wakeup is from the head
> of the list and culling from the end.
Right -- idle_cull_fn() reaps from the tail (list_last_entry), i.e. the
worker with the oldest last_active, and stops once nr_idle drops to 2,
while kick_pool() wakes the head. So in the common case the kicked
worker (head) and the cull victim (tail) are different workers.
What I'm less sure about: the cull decision is purely time based -- it
reaps the tail worker only if worker->last_active + IDLE_WORKER_TIMEOUT
has elapsed -- but last_active is written in exactly one place,
worker_enter_idle(). Neither kick_pool()/kick_pool_pick() nor
worker_leave_idle() update it; it is only read by the two cull timers.
So being kicked gives a worker no grace period against the cull: a
worker that has already been idle ~IDLE_WORKER_TIMEOUT and is then
kicked still looks expired, and if it drifts off the head (other
workers going idle ahead of it) before it gets a chance to run, the
cull can still reap it.
Would it make sense to refresh last_active when a worker is kicked? The
cull walks tail->head and breaks at the first non-expired worker, so a
freshly-stamped kicked worker would simply be skipped while genuinely
old workers behind it are still reaped.
Thanks for the review,
--breno
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-05 14:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-03 13:40 [PATCH v2 0/4] workqueue: Shrink the lock time Breno Leitao
2026-06-03 13:40 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] workqueue: park kicked worker on pool->kicked_list Breno Leitao
2026-06-04 8:50 ` Tejun Heo
2026-06-05 14:40 ` Breno Leitao [this message]
2026-06-05 17:30 ` Tejun Heo
2026-06-08 17:12 ` Breno Leitao
2026-06-03 13:40 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] workqueue: split kick_pool() into kick_pool_pick() + wake_up_q() Breno Leitao
2026-06-03 13:40 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] workqueue: defer the worker wakeup outside pool->lock in __queue_work() Breno Leitao
2026-06-03 13:40 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] workqueue: defer the worker wakeup outside pool->lock in process_one_work() Breno Leitao
2026-06-04 8:50 ` Tejun Heo
2026-06-04 15:29 ` Breno Leitao
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=aiLSOAcx_v1rrMdD@gmail.com \
--to=leitao@debian.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=hdanton@sina.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marco.crivellari@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 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.