Linux cgroups development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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 --]

  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