From: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
To: Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@hauke-m.de>
Cc: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@kernel.org>,
sashal@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
frederic@kernel.org, david@redhat.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
paulmck@kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
"Luis R . Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] kernel/fork: Increase minimum number of allowed threads
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2025 19:28:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250721192830.6f8f57d9@pumpkin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1f81e064-1b19-475d-b48c-39f56381058c@hauke-m.de>
On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 17:28:20 +0200
Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@hauke-m.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am not exactly sure how I should limit the number of parallel user
> mode helper calls.
> The user mode helper is calling wait_for_initramfs() so it could be that
> some calls are getting queued at the early bootup. This is probably the
> problem I am hitting.
>
> I do not want to block the device creation till the user mode helper
> finished. This could also result in a deadlock and would probably slow
> down bootup.
>
> When I limit the number of user mode helper calls to 1 and let the
> others wait in a system queue, I might block other unrelated tasks in
> the system queue.
>
> I would create an own queue and let the async user mode helper wait in
> this queue to only execute one at a time. When one of them needs a long
> time in user space it would block the others. This workqueue would also
> be active all the time. After the bootup it would probably not do much
> work any more.
>
> I do not like any of these solutions. Do you have better ideas?
Could you put the requests onto a private queue but use a system work queue
function the clear the queue - only starting the function if there isn't
a copy running?
David
>
> Hauke
>
> On 7/18/25 00:52, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
> > On 7/17/25 23:34, David Laight wrote:
> >> On Thu, 17 Jul 2025 07:26:59 +0200
> >> Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@kernel.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Cc wqueue & umode helper folks
> >>>
> >>> On 12. 07. 25, 1:08, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
> >>>> A modern Linux system creates much more than 20 threads at bootup.
> >>>> When I booted up OpenWrt in qemu the system sometimes failed to boot up
> >>>> when it wanted to create the 419th thread. The VM had 128MB RAM and the
> >>>> calculation in set_max_threads() calculated that max_threads should be
> >>>> set to 419. When the system booted up it tried to notify the user space
> >>>> about every device it created because CONFIG_UEVENT_HELPER was set and
> >>>> used. I counted 1299 calls to call_usermodehelper_setup(), all of
> >>>> them try to create a new thread and call the userspace hotplug
> >>>> script in
> >>>> it.
> >>>>
> >>>> This fixes bootup of Linux on systems with low memory.
> >>>>
> >>>> I saw the problem with qemu 10.0.2 using these commands:
> >>>> qemu-system-aarch64 -machine virt -cpu cortex-a57 -nographic
> >>>>
> >>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@hauke-m.de>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> kernel/fork.c | 2 +-
> >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c
> >>>> index 7966c9a1c163..388299525f3c 100644
> >>>> --- a/kernel/fork.c
> >>>> +++ b/kernel/fork.c
> >>>> @@ -115,7 +115,7 @@
> >>>> /*
> >>>> * Minimum number of threads to boot the kernel
> >>>> */
> >>>> -#define MIN_THREADS 20
> >>>> +#define MIN_THREADS 600
> >>>
> >>> As David noted, this is not the proper fix. It appears that usermode
> >>> helper should use limited thread pool. I.e. instead of
> >>> system_unbound_wq, alloc_workqueue("", WQ_UNBOUND, max_active) with
> >>> max_active set to max_threads divided by some arbitrary constant (3?
> >>> 4?)?
> >>
> >> Or maybe just 1 ?
> >> I'd guess all the threads either block in the same place or just block
> >> each other??
> >
> > I will reduce the number of threads. Maybe to max 5 or maybe just one.
> >
> > I think we should still increase the minimum number of threads, but
> > something like 60 to 100 should be fine. It is calculated based RAM size
> > 128MB RAM resulted already in 419 max threads.
> >
> > Hauke
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-21 18:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-11 23:08 [PATCH v2] kernel/fork: Increase minimum number of allowed threads Hauke Mehrtens
2025-07-12 6:50 ` Greg KH
2025-07-17 5:26 ` Jiri Slaby
2025-07-17 21:34 ` David Laight
2025-07-17 22:52 ` Hauke Mehrtens
2025-07-20 15:28 ` Hauke Mehrtens
2025-07-21 18:28 ` David Laight [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=20250721192830.6f8f57d9@pumpkin \
--to=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=hauke@hauke-m.de \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=jirislaby@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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