[PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee

Eric Dumazet
2015-08-29T02:42:36Z

From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>

In commit f341861fb0b ("task_work: add a scheduling point in
task_work_run()") I fixed a latency problem adding a cond_resched()
call.

Later, commit ac3d0da8f329 added yet another loop to reverse a list,
bringing back the latency spike :

I've seen in some cases this loop taking 275 ms, if for example a
process with 2,000,000 files is killed.

We could add yet another cond_resched() in the reverse loop, or we
can simply remove the reversal, as I do not think anything
would depend on order of task_work_add() submitted works.

Fixes: ac3d0da8f329 ("task_work: Make task_work_add() lockless")
Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Reported-by: Maciej Żenczykowski <maze@google.com>
---
kernel/task_work.c | 12 ++----------
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/task_work.c b/kernel/task_work.c
index 8727032e3a6f..53fa971d000d 100644
--- a/kernel/task_work.c
+++ b/kernel/task_work.c
@@ -18,6 +18,8 @@ static struct callback_head work_exited; /* all we need is ->next == NULL */
* This is like the signal handler which runs in kernel mode, but it doesn't
* try to wake up the @task.
*
+ * Note: there is no ordering guarantee on works queued here.
+ *
* RETURNS:
* 0 if succeeds or -ESRCH.
*/
@@ -108,16 +110,6 @@ void task_work_run(void)
raw_spin_unlock_wait(&task->pi_lock);
smp_mb();

- /* Reverse the list to run the works in fifo order */
- head = NULL;
- do {
- next = work->next;
- work->next = head;
- head = work;
- work = next;
- } while (work);
-
- work = head;
do {
next = work->next;
work->func(work);