From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: vigashini kesavan <vigashinikesavan@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RT wakeup latency due to unbound workqueue execution (runtime mitigation?)
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2026 17:30:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260312163050.bXFoRAEH@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOcTU28hkopDkCRHert9J43V_1rcq2uwnPAeE2D5r6rY0Xb7Kg@mail.gmail.com>
On 2026-02-02 13:42:07 [+0200], vigashini kesavan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am investigating occasional cyclictest wakeup latency spikes on a
> PREEMPT_RT system (Linux 6.1.158-rt) and have traced it to the
> execution of unbound workqueue items (flush_memcg_stats_dwork,
> wb_workfn) on the measurement CPU.
>
> These are observed under default Boot-time parameters, without any
> modification to parameters such as isolcpus, nohz_full parameters or
> workqueue cpumask. The intention is to analyze latency behaviour under
> default boot-time configuration, relying only on runtime mechanisms
> such as cgroup configuration or task level CPU affinity.
> Manual pinning of kworker threads through task affinity was tried
> without success.
You can't pin an unbound worker to a CPU, this just does not work long
term. If you want this work to be invoked only a specific CPU you could
do replace the queue_delayed_work() invokcation with something like
queue_delayed_work_on(1, system_wq, &stats_flush_dwork, FLUSH_TIME);
to have it invoked always on CPU1.
> Question:
> Is there a supported or recommended runtime mechanism to prevent
> unbound workqueue execution on a specific CPU. Or to defer this class
> of work away from any CPU? (without any boot-time workqueue cpumasks)
The hack above would be one way. But since you asked for recommended:
There is /sys/devices/virtual/workqueue/cpumask which contains the CPUs
for "unbound" workqueues. This has an effect on all of them.
> Also, is there any option to attribute the unbound workqueue execution
> to any kernel subsystems or runtime activities that could queue this
> work. To better understand any potential userspace triggers for this.
That folder
/sys/devices/virtual/workqueue/
contains all the options you have. Some workqueues are dedicated and
have a name and allow changes. Other do not. The one you named, does
not use a specific workqueue but a generic one.
> Any guidance would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Vigashini Kesavan
Sebastian
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-12 16:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-02 11:42 RT wakeup latency due to unbound workqueue execution (runtime mitigation?) vigashini kesavan
2026-03-12 16:30 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
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=20260312163050.bXFoRAEH@linutronix.de \
--to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vigashinikesavan@gmail.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