From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A11901F941 for ; Tue, 23 Apr 2024 06:20:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.158.5 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713853248; cv=none; b=kTv4upQ3wmCgLE1PARh4go6iVhpf5UH3f0HtOcw6qBVzgwPr9zptJsNN//URxR98lsOk2gJLSxxFVaofzc6Dy9/rVCw593G1yIdH5mzUL1LflpSEC8Dtfs7rz2rnsCNwaRcT3i+pxfQN1+st1O6m62Lr+gCb5Ekx6QS/q2ynZSU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713853248; c=relaxed/simple; bh=J6Fj1F3NpWgKsDIEg8NuZo1Or6yC7yCLCTvbT2l50q8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=dxY7MPNUzAX25XtBjL/OgH0yRSjm/GjFjz/6EzXieCnYEs5GZ13omyGo6wUOfXF7QnWpoJcJ0DRsqadYOuEtI45IJiMECoa7FNov3acK2RwYk0himv6UqGgp3hyp0kLxzc7Ugxw/OMstrb/9bsI/iWRh9Wkh7+SYRryiPMxUiGo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b=Q9VCzKRn; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.158.5 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b="Q9VCzKRn" Received: from pps.filterd (m0353724.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 43N5jjMt002786; Tue, 23 Apr 2024 06:20:43 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : in-reply-to : references : date : message-id : mime-version : content-type; s=pp1; bh=9i+gI7GJTP6aOmWlB0wfD0+m11Dn+3jK6XAXlpAEIkw=; b=Q9VCzKRnSPDFCZz8x7uyuQJjfOLbG533yPUMHwj+8yRd2zK384iNViR/YNCUM2p9nVTf vkAGFG/Dj4wjBo0rsVGVDDmE27F/JIEGAfacKfyoqSay005nv+JZ/EDW8h3OJIhFelah xQdnoH9kVQAxQYw1FdyCr9MdKxZTtEArFEyIB3Y6Es1YHkVbZUL+eDqLu0t1gTMFXCmy v8k48cRnzRHNIbmZOcNb3DL9twkRD3cfW0sry8M3Fy92LqRlxQYrKlpDJvn6mbTVEm6x Q3Ob2fyGs39KrblHJKA4wZL9SBrkbYIza8HVz4fB04+nQ5hu3kPUiuPLODf7SDGrdhEe sw== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3xp5fmr445-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 23 Apr 2024 06:20:42 +0000 Received: from m0353724.ppops.net (m0353724.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 43N6KgqE029387; Tue, 23 Apr 2024 06:20:42 GMT Received: from ppma12.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (dc.9e.1632.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [50.22.158.220]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3xp5fmr443-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 23 Apr 2024 06:20:42 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma12.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma12.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 43N2lbFB029905; Tue, 23 Apr 2024 06:20:41 GMT Received: from smtprelay03.fra02v.mail.ibm.com ([9.218.2.224]) by ppma12.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3xmr1tc884-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 23 Apr 2024 06:20:41 +0000 Received: from smtpav05.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav05.fra02v.mail.ibm.com [10.20.54.104]) by smtprelay03.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 43N6Kcbk41156920 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 23 Apr 2024 06:20:40 GMT Received: from smtpav05.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B7B72004F; Tue, 23 Apr 2024 06:20:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav05.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 027532004E; Tue, 23 Apr 2024 06:20:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from tuxmaker.linux.ibm.com (unknown [9.152.85.9]) by smtpav05.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 23 Apr 2024 06:20:37 +0000 (GMT) From: Sven Schnelle To: Tejun Heo Cc: Lai Jiangshan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] workqueue: fix selection of wake_cpu in kick_pool() In-Reply-To: (Tejun Heo's message of "Mon, 22 Apr 2024 12:44:43 -1000") References: <20240415053550.538722-1-svens@linux.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 08:20:37 +0200 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: nZP3TTNkkYjut-E6EjqciBvhivWWlalc X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: gbUNgFpjofqZqhhKhkzhMMD-wzQfN6dX X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1011,Hydra:6.0.619,FMLib:17.11.176.26 definitions=2024-04-23_04,2024-04-22_01,2023-05-22_02 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 priorityscore=1501 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 clxscore=1015 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2404010000 definitions=main-2404230017 Tejun Heo writes: > Hello, > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 07:35:49AM +0200, Sven Schnelle wrote: >> diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c >> index 0066c8f6c154..d02b0c02c9e2 100644 >> --- a/kernel/workqueue.c >> +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c >> @@ -1277,7 +1277,8 @@ static bool kick_pool(struct worker_pool *pool) >> !cpumask_test_cpu(p->wake_cpu, pool->attrs->__pod_cpumask)) { >> struct work_struct *work = list_first_entry(&pool->worklist, >> struct work_struct, entry); >> - p->wake_cpu = cpumask_any_distribute(pool->attrs->__pod_cpumask); >> + p->wake_cpu = cpumask_any_and_distribute(pool->attrs->__pod_cpumask, >> + cpu_online_mask); > > So, this wouldn't necessarily fix the problem completely but regardless of > how that's plugged, this is still something we want to do to avoid picking > offline CPUs. Can you please update the patch description accordingly and > resend? I'll just sent v2. I didn't mention the arch_vcpu_is_preempted() issue in the commit description, as i'm not yet sure whether that's a wrong assumption the s390 code or in the common code. Still waiting whether Peter has some insight.