From: "Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>
To: Junnan Zhang <zhangjn_dev@163.com>
Cc: tj@kernel.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Junnan Zhang <zhangjn11@chinatelecom.cn>,
Shouxin Sun <sunshx@chinatelecom.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] cgroup: avoid flushing global workqueue in cgroup1_pidlist_destroy_all
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2026 10:16:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <apU1sXYP_QhsQFcB@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260814102052.147408-1-zhangjn_dev@163.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3099 bytes --]
Hi Junnan.
(Sorry for late response, I sketched some notes and then didn't get down
to sent them. Now they're below.)
On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 06:20:52PM +0800, Junnan Zhang <zhangjn_dev@163.com> wrote:
> From: Junnan Zhang <zhangjn11@chinatelecom.cn>
>
> cgroup1_pidlist_destroy_all() flushes the global
> cgroup_pidlist_destroy_wq while destroying a cgroup. Because all cgroup
> v1 pidlist destruction work items are queued on the same shared workqueue,
> a single slow or stuck work item (e.g. waiting for pidlist_mutex held by a
> user-space reader) blocks every concurrent cgroup destruction path.
>
> This can lead to kworker tasks stuck in flush_workqueue() for over
> hung_task_timeout seconds, as observed on busy systems running Docker or
> Kubernetes workloads.
Since the cgroup_pidlist_destroy_wq is already a dedicated workqueue (no
other conteders), the pursuit of pidlist_mutex holder is a feasible
theory. However, that would also mean:
a) a single reader taking more than hung_task_timeout_secs (that'd be
a softlockup earlier),
b) starvation of cgroup1_pidlist_destroy_all() by many (queued)
cgroup_pidlist_start() callers which goes against the second-long
caching of pidlists,
c) there is large number of nr_cgroups * nr_pidnses which makes the
caching ineffective
>
> INFO: task kworker/0:1:1438499 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> kworker/0:1 D 0 1438499 2 0x80000080
> Workqueue: cgroup_destroy css_free_rwork_fn
> ? __schedule+0x296/0x900
> schedule+0x28/0x80
> schedule_timeout+0x1ee/0x3a0
> ? kvm_sched_clock_read+0xd/0x20
> wait_for_completion+0x12c/0x190
> ? wake_up_q+0x70/0x70
> flush_workqueue+0x132/0x430
> ? cgroup1_pidlist_destroy_all+0x7c/0xa0
> cgroup1_pidlist_destroy_all+0x7c/0xa0
> css_free_rwork_fn+0xb5/0x390
> process_one_work+0x195/0x3e0
> worker_thread+0x30/0x390
> ? process_one_work+0x3e0/0x3e0
> kthread+0x113/0x130
> ? kthread_create_worker_on_cpu+0x70/0x70
> ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x40
>
> Fix it by moving the cgroup's pidlists to a local orphan list under
> pidlist_mutex, clearing their ->owner pointer, and then cancelling each
> pidlist's delayed work outside the lock. The destroy work function now
> checks ->owner and skips freeing orphaned pidlists, so
> cgroup1_pidlist_destroy_all() can free them safely without flushing the
> whole shared workqueue.
What's the point of the workqueue after this change? (Mainly the
expiration + having process context for the handler.)
The flushing isn't necessary if there's a way how to ensure pidlists
head won't be used after cgrp removal, which the fix should achieve.
So I'd say, the narrow-focused cancellation may work, no need to wait
for other cgroups. OTOH, I'm surprised this v1-issue popped up only now
and whether such a long contention can happen over pidlist_mutex as your
commit message implies. What nr_cgroups, nr_pidnses could cause this in
your theory?
Thanks,
Michal
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 265 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-31 8:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-14 8:40 [PATCH] cgroup: avoid flushing global workqueue in cgroup1_pidlist_destroy_all Junnan Zhang
2026-08-14 9:45 ` [PATCH v2] " Junnan Zhang
2026-08-14 10:20 ` [PATCH v3] " Junnan Zhang
2026-08-31 7:39 ` Junnan Zhang
2026-08-31 8:16 ` Michal Koutný [this message]
2026-09-01 1:53 ` Ridong Chen
2026-09-01 3:48 ` Junnan Zhang
2026-09-01 3:51 ` Junnan Zhang
[not found] ` <FIXME-fill-in-Michals-message-id>
2026-09-01 3:38 ` Junnan Zhang
2026-09-01 3:39 ` Junnan Zhang
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=apU1sXYP_QhsQFcB@localhost.localdomain \
--to=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sunshx@chinatelecom.cn \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=zhangjn11@chinatelecom.cn \
--cc=zhangjn_dev@163.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