From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
padovan@profusion.mobi, marcel@holtmann.org,
peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, davem@davemloft.net,
dougthompson@xmission.com, ibm-acpi@hmh.eng.br, cbou@mail.ru,
rui.zhang@intel.com, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 04/15] workqueue: disable preemption while manipulating PENDING
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 13:10:48 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120730201048.GF20067@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1343433308-26614-5-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org>
>From bdbc04720254d1a84504074a6b25189961030803 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 13:03:57 -0700
Queueing operations use WORK_STRUCT_PENDING_BIT to synchronize access
to the target work item. They first try to claim the bit and proceed
with queueing only after that succeeds and there's a window between
PENDING being set and the actual queueing where the task can be
preempted.
There's also a similar window in process_one_work() when clearing
PENDING. A work item is dequeued, gcwq->lock is released and then
PENDING is cleared and the worker might get preempted between
releasing gcwq->lock and clearing PENDING.
cancel[_delayed]_work_sync() tries to claim or steal PENDING. The
function assumes that a work item with PENDING is either queued, or in
the process of being queued. In the latter case, it busy-loops until
either the work item loses PENDING or is queued. If canceling
coincides with the above described preemptions, the canceling task
will busy-loop while the queueing or executing task is preempted.
This patch keeps preemption disabled across claiming PENDING and
actual queueing and moves PENDING clearing in process_one_work()
inside gcwq->lock so that busy looping from PENDING && !queued doesn't
wait for preempted tasks. Note that, in process_one_work(), setting
last CPU and clearing PENDING got merged into single operation.
v2: __queue_work() was testing preempt_count() to ensure that the
caller has disabled preemption. This triggers spuriously if
!CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT. Use preemptible() instead. Reported by
Fengguang Wu.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
---
git branch updated accordingly.
kernel/workqueue.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
1 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 5c26d36..f6eaf34 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -537,9 +537,10 @@ static int work_next_color(int color)
* work is on queue. Once execution starts, WORK_STRUCT_CWQ is
* cleared and the work data contains the cpu number it was last on.
*
- * set_work_{cwq|cpu}() and clear_work_data() can be used to set the
- * cwq, cpu or clear work->data. These functions should only be
- * called while the work is owned - ie. while the PENDING bit is set.
+ * set_work_cwq(), set_work_cpu_and_clear_pending() and clear_work_data()
+ * can be used to set the cwq, cpu or clear work->data. These functions
+ * should only be called while the work is owned - ie. while the PENDING
+ * bit is set.
*
* get_work_[g]cwq() can be used to obtain the gcwq or cwq
* corresponding to a work. gcwq is available once the work has been
@@ -561,9 +562,10 @@ static void set_work_cwq(struct work_struct *work,
WORK_STRUCT_PENDING | WORK_STRUCT_CWQ | extra_flags);
}
-static void set_work_cpu(struct work_struct *work, unsigned int cpu)
+static void set_work_cpu_and_clear_pending(struct work_struct *work,
+ unsigned int cpu)
{
- set_work_data(work, cpu << WORK_STRUCT_FLAG_BITS, WORK_STRUCT_PENDING);
+ set_work_data(work, cpu << WORK_STRUCT_FLAG_BITS, 0);
}
static void clear_work_data(struct work_struct *work)
@@ -983,6 +985,15 @@ static void __queue_work(unsigned int cpu, struct workqueue_struct *wq,
unsigned int work_flags;
unsigned long flags;
+ /*
+ * While a work item is PENDING && off queue, a task trying to
+ * steal the PENDING will busy-loop waiting for it to either get
+ * queued or lose PENDING, so a task shouldn't be preempted between
+ * grabbing PENDING and queueing @work. Make sure the caller has
+ * preemption disabled.
+ */
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(preemptible());
+
debug_work_activate(work);
/* if dying, only works from the same workqueue are allowed */
@@ -1068,10 +1079,14 @@ bool queue_work_on(int cpu, struct workqueue_struct *wq,
{
bool ret = false;
+ preempt_disable();
+
if (!test_and_set_bit(WORK_STRUCT_PENDING_BIT, work_data_bits(work))) {
__queue_work(cpu, wq, work);
ret = true;
}
+
+ preempt_enable();
return ret;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(queue_work_on);
@@ -1121,6 +1136,12 @@ bool queue_delayed_work_on(int cpu, struct workqueue_struct *wq,
struct work_struct *work = &dwork->work;
bool ret = false;
+ /*
+ * We shouldn't get preempted between claiming PENDING and adding
+ * timer. Read the comment in __queue_work() for details.
+ */
+ preempt_disable();
+
if (!test_and_set_bit(WORK_STRUCT_PENDING_BIT, work_data_bits(work))) {
unsigned int lcpu;
@@ -1156,6 +1177,8 @@ bool queue_delayed_work_on(int cpu, struct workqueue_struct *wq,
add_timer(timer);
ret = true;
}
+
+ preempt_enable();
return ret;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(queue_delayed_work_on);
@@ -1970,15 +1993,13 @@ __acquires(&gcwq->lock)
return;
}
- /* claim and process */
+ /* claim and dequeue */
debug_work_deactivate(work);
hlist_add_head(&worker->hentry, bwh);
worker->current_work = work;
worker->current_cwq = cwq;
work_color = get_work_color(work);
- /* record the current cpu number in the work data and dequeue */
- set_work_cpu(work, gcwq->cpu);
list_del_init(&work->entry);
/*
@@ -1995,10 +2016,18 @@ __acquires(&gcwq->lock)
if ((worker->flags & WORKER_UNBOUND) && need_more_worker(pool))
wake_up_worker(pool);
- spin_unlock_irq(&gcwq->lock);
+ /*
+ * Record the last CPU and clear PENDING. The following wmb is
+ * paired with the implied mb in test_and_set_bit(PENDING) and
+ * ensures all updates to @work made here are visible to and
+ * precede any updates by the next PENDING owner. Also, clearing
+ * PENDING is inside @gcwq->lock so that we don't get preempted
+ * with PENDING set and @work off queue.
+ */
+ smp_wmb();
+ set_work_cpu_and_clear_pending(work, gcwq->cpu);
- smp_wmb(); /* paired with test_and_set_bit(PENDING) */
- work_clear_pending(work);
+ spin_unlock_irq(&gcwq->lock);
lock_map_acquire_read(&cwq->wq->lockdep_map);
lock_map_acquire(&lockdep_map);
@@ -2836,9 +2865,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cancel_work_sync);
*/
bool flush_delayed_work(struct delayed_work *dwork)
{
+ preempt_disable();
if (del_timer_sync(&dwork->timer))
__queue_work(raw_smp_processor_id(),
get_work_cwq(&dwork->work)->wq, &dwork->work);
+ preempt_enable();
return flush_work(&dwork->work);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(flush_delayed_work);
@@ -2857,9 +2888,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(flush_delayed_work);
*/
bool flush_delayed_work_sync(struct delayed_work *dwork)
{
+ preempt_disable();
if (del_timer_sync(&dwork->timer))
__queue_work(raw_smp_processor_id(),
get_work_cwq(&dwork->work)->wq, &dwork->work);
+ preempt_enable();
return flush_work_sync(&dwork->work);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(flush_delayed_work_sync);
--
1.7.7.3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-30 20:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-27 23:54 [PATCHSET wq/for-3.7] workqueue: implement mod_delayed_work[_on]() Tejun Heo
2012-07-27 23:54 ` [PATCH 01/15] workqueue: reorder queueing functions so that _on() variants are on top Tejun Heo
2012-07-27 23:54 ` [PATCH 02/15] workqueue: make queueing functions return bool Tejun Heo
2012-07-27 23:54 ` [PATCH 03/15] workqueue: add missing smp_wmb() in process_one_work() Tejun Heo
2012-07-27 23:54 ` [PATCH 04/15] workqueue: disable preemption while manipulating PENDING Tejun Heo
2012-07-30 20:10 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2012-07-27 23:54 ` [PATCH 05/15] workqueue: set delayed_work->timer function on initialization Tejun Heo
2012-07-27 23:54 ` [PATCH 06/15] workqueue: unify local CPU queueing handling Tejun Heo
2012-07-27 23:55 ` [PATCH 07/15] workqueue: fix zero @delay handling of queue_delayed_work_on() Tejun Heo
2012-07-27 23:55 ` [PATCH 08/15] workqueue: move try_to_grab_pending() upwards Tejun Heo
2012-07-27 23:55 ` [PATCH 09/15] workqueue: introduce WORK_OFFQ_FLAG_* Tejun Heo
2012-07-27 23:55 ` [PATCH 10/15] workqueue: factor out __queue_delayed_work() from queue_delayed_work_on() Tejun Heo
2012-07-27 23:55 ` [PATCH 11/15] workqueue: reorganize try_to_grab_pending() and __cancel_timer_work() Tejun Heo
2012-07-27 23:55 ` [PATCH 12/15] workqueue: mark a work item being canceled as such Tejun Heo
2012-07-30 20:11 ` [PATCH v2 " Tejun Heo
2012-07-27 23:55 ` [PATCH 13/15] workqueue: implement mod_delayed_work[_on]() Tejun Heo
2012-07-27 23:55 ` [PATCH 14/15] workqueue: use mod_delayed_work() instead of cancel + queue Tejun Heo
2012-07-28 1:05 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2012-07-28 1:28 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2012-07-29 20:55 ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-07-31 17:55 ` [PATCH v2 " Tejun Heo
2012-07-27 23:55 ` [PATCH 15/15] workqueue: deprecate __cancel_delayed_work() Tejun Heo
2012-07-31 13:05 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2012-07-31 17:11 ` Tejun Heo
2012-07-31 17:51 ` Tejun Heo
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=20120730201048.GF20067@google.com \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cbou@mail.ru \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dougthompson@xmission.com \
--cc=ibm-acpi@hmh.eng.br \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcel@holtmann.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=padovan@profusion.mobi \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rui.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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 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).