public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@online.de>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@benyossef.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kmod: Run usermodehelpers only on cpus allowed for kthreadd V2
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2013 17:31:14 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131108163112.GA12853@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0000014238407a1c-34e7bdbc-45c0-48de-a8a3-94a99f276044-000000@email.amazonses.com>

On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 03:06:59PM +0000, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Nov 2013, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 
> > usermodehelper works are created via workqueues, right? And workqueues are an issue as
> > well for those who want CPU isolation.
> 
> AFAICT usermodehelper can be called from a variety of contexts.

But it looks like it always end up calling a workqueue. May be I missed something though.

Now we can argue that this workqueue seem to create kernel threads, which in turn create other kernel thread (uhh?)
and I don't know if those inherit the kworker affinity. But from a quick look, it seems to me that
this is what we want.

BTW the use of kernel_thread is justified in this comment: "/* Keventd can't block, but this (a child) can. */"
Do these kernel_threads exist because kworker can't block? Actually the new workqueue subsystem can have blocking
worklets now, may be something can be simplified there although I haven't checked the details. But perhaps
we can spare one level of kernel threads.

Can't we use kthreads there btw? Or may be we need a task->mm to do the user things.

> 
> > So this looks like a more general problem than just call_usermodehelper.
> 
> Well the code explicitly sets the the affinity mask to all cpus which
> creates a problem for low latency processors. It does not inherit the
> affinity from any calling process.

But how is that an argument in favour of changing this to inheriting the affinity from
the workqueue thread rather than kthread?

> 
> > Last time I checked, it seemed to me that this is an unbound workqueue? If so can't we tune
> > the affinity of this workqueue? If not perhaps that's something we want to solve and which
> > could be useful for all the users who don't want their CPU to be disturbed.
> 
> There are various contexts from which usermodehelper can be called.
> Drivers use it etc.

But they all converge to the workqueue, or I'm missing other code paths?

Thanks.

  reply	other threads:[~2013-11-08 16:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-10-16 14:44 [PATCH] kmod: Run usermodehelpers only on cpus allowed for kthreadd Christoph Lameter
2013-10-16 21:13 ` Andrew Morton
2013-10-16 22:37   ` Christoph Lameter
2013-10-17 19:23     ` Andrew Morton
2013-11-07 16:43       ` [PATCH] kmod: Run usermodehelpers only on cpus allowed for kthreadd V2 Christoph Lameter
2013-11-07 22:50         ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-11-08 15:06           ` Christoph Lameter
2013-11-08 16:31             ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2013-11-08 17:05               ` Christoph Lameter
2013-11-08 19:12                 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-11-08 19:52                   ` Christoph Lameter
2013-11-08 20:06                     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-04-08 20:57                       ` Andrew Morton
2014-04-08 21:56                         ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-10-17 13:55 ` [PATCH] kmod: Run usermodehelpers only on cpus allowed for kthreadd Frederic Weisbecker
2013-10-17 15:24   ` Christoph Lameter
2013-10-17 16:07     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-10-17 17:50       ` Andrew Morton
2013-10-17 18:24         ` Christoph Lameter
2013-10-17 22:27         ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-10-20 18:00           ` Christoph Lameter
2013-10-17 18:23       ` Christoph Lameter

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=20131108163112.GA12853@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bitbucket@online.de \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=gilad@benyossef.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=vapier@gentoo.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