linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev>
To: Julian Sun <sunjunchao@bytedance.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: mhiramat@kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org,
	jack@suse.cz, mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org,
	juri.lelli@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
	dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
	bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de, vschneid@redhat.com,
	agruenba@redhat.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, mhocko@kernel.org,
	roman.gushchin@linux.dev, shakeel.butt@linux.dev,
	muchun.song@linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Suppress undesirable hung task warnings.
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2025 10:30:18 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <9665ff9f-3e1d-4c39-8c8f-b9e12fb4d5f4@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250922145754.31890092257495f70db3909d@linux-foundation.org>



On 2025/9/23 05:57, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Sep 2025 19:38:21 +0800 Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev> wrote:
> 
>> On 2025/9/22 17:41, Julian Sun wrote:
>>> As suggested by Andrew Morton in [1], we need a general mechanism
>>> that allows the hung task detector to ignore unnecessary hung
>>
>> Yep, I understand the goal is to suppress what can be a benign hung task
>> warning during memcg teardown.
>>
>>> tasks. This patch set implements this functionality.
>>>
>>> Patch 1 introduces a PF_DONT_HUNG flag. The hung task detector will
>>> ignores all tasks that have the PF_DONT_HUNG flag set.
>>
>> However, I'm concerned that the PF_DONT_HUNG flag is a bit too powerful
>> and might mask real, underlying hangs.
> 
> I think that's OK if the calling task is discriminating about it.  Just
> set PF_DONT_HUNG (unpleasing name!) around those bits of code where
> it's needed, clear it otherwise.

Makes sense to me :)

> 
> Julian, did you take a look at what a touch_hung_task_detector() would
> involve?  It's a bit of an interface inconsistency - our various other
> timeout detectors (softlockup, NMI, rcu) each have a touch_ function.

On second thought, I agree that a touch_hung_task_detector() would be a
much better approach for interface consistency.

We could implement touch_hung_task_detector() to grant the task temporary
immunity from hung task checks for as long as it remains uninterruptible.
Once the task becomes runnable again, the immunity is automatically revoked.

Something like this:

---
diff --git a/include/linux/hung_task.h b/include/linux/hung_task.h
index c4403eeb7144..fac92039dce0 100644
--- a/include/linux/hung_task.h
+++ b/include/linux/hung_task.h
@@ -98,4 +98,9 @@ static inline void *hung_task_blocker_to_lock(unsigned 
long blocker)
  }
  #endif

+void touch_hung_task_detector(struct task_struct *t)
+{
+	t->last_switch_count = ULONG_MAX;
+}
+
  #endif /* __LINUX_HUNG_TASK_H */
diff --git a/kernel/hung_task.c b/kernel/hung_task.c
index 8708a1205f82..094a277b3b39 100644
--- a/kernel/hung_task.c
+++ b/kernel/hung_task.c
@@ -203,6 +203,9 @@ static void check_hung_task(struct task_struct *t, 
unsigned long timeout)
  	if (unlikely(!switch_count))
  		return;

+	if (t->last_switch_count == ULONG_MAX)
+		return;
+
  	if (switch_count != t->last_switch_count) {
  		t->last_switch_count = switch_count;
  		t->last_switch_time = jiffies;
@@ -317,6 +320,9 @@ static void 
check_hung_uninterruptible_tasks(unsigned long timeout)
  		    !(state & TASK_WAKEKILL) &&
  		    !(state & TASK_NOLOAD))
  			check_hung_task(t, timeout);
+		else if (t->last_switch_count == ULONG_MAX)
+			t->last_switch_count = t->nvcsw + t->nivcsw;
+
  	}
   unlock:
  	rcu_read_unlock();
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index 8dc470aa6c3c..3d5f36455b74 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -3910,8 +3910,10 @@ static void mem_cgroup_css_free(struct 
cgroup_subsys_state *css)
  	int __maybe_unused i;

  #ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_WRITEBACK
-	for (i = 0; i < MEMCG_CGWB_FRN_CNT; i++)
+	for (i = 0; i < MEMCG_CGWB_FRN_CNT; i++) {
+		touch_hung_task_detector(current);
  		wb_wait_for_completion(&memcg->cgwb_frn[i].done);
+	}
  #endif
  	if (cgroup_subsys_on_dfl(memory_cgrp_subsys) && !cgroup_memory_nosocket)
  		static_branch_dec(&memcg_sockets_enabled_key);
---

Using ULONG_MAX as a marker to grant this immunity. As long as the task
remains in state D, check_hung_task() sees the marker and bails out.

  reply	other threads:[~2025-09-23  2:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-09-22  9:41 [PATCH 0/3] Suppress undesirable hung task warnings Julian Sun
2025-09-22  9:41 ` [PATCH 1/3] sched: Introduce a new flag PF_DONT_HUNG Julian Sun
2025-09-22  9:41 ` [PATCH 2/3] writeback: Introduce wb_wait_for_completion_no_hung() Julian Sun
2025-09-22  9:41 ` [PATCH 3/3] memcg: Don't trigger hung task warnings when memcg is releasing resources Julian Sun
2025-09-22 11:38 ` [PATCH 0/3] Suppress undesirable hung task warnings Lance Yang
2025-09-22 12:40   ` Julian Sun
2025-09-22 13:12     ` Lance Yang
2025-09-22 21:57   ` Andrew Morton
2025-09-23  2:30     ` Lance Yang [this message]
2025-09-23  2:45       ` [External] " Julian Sun
2025-09-23  3:18         ` Lance Yang
2025-09-22 13:07 ` Michal Hocko
2025-09-22 14:24   ` [External] " Julian Sun
2025-09-22 13:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-22 14:29   ` [External] " Julian Sun
2025-09-22 15:27   ` Jan Kara
2025-09-22 18:08   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-09-22 21:50     ` Andrew Morton
2025-09-23  7:16       ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-23 12:44         ` Masami Hiramatsu
2025-09-24 10:34         ` Jan Kara
2025-09-25 15:07           ` [External] " Julian Sun
2025-09-25 16:30             ` Jan Kara

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=9665ff9f-3e1d-4c39-8c8f-b9e12fb4d5f4@linux.dev \
    --to=lance.yang@linux.dev \
    --cc=agruenba@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
    --cc=sunjunchao@bytedance.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).