diff options
author | Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> | 2012-09-12 07:16:54 +0800 |
---|---|---|
committer | Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> | 2012-09-12 07:16:54 +0800 |
commit | 0bd1189e239c76eb3a50e458548fbe7e4a5dfff1 (patch) | |
tree | 8c46cfcd8ab9d94bbcfaaf5969a79b6b11914042 | |
parent | 274a2f5ddb3e8bf67e561574e6529a65a4039240 (diff) | |
parent | ee378aa49b594da9bda6a2c768cc5b2ad585f911 (diff) | |
download | linux-0bd1189e239c76eb3a50e458548fbe7e4a5dfff1.tar.bz2 |
Merge branch 'for-3.6-fixes' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/wq
Pull workqueue fixes from Tejun Heo:
"It's later than I'd like but well the timing just didn't work out this
time.
There are three bug fixes. One from before 3.6-rc1 and two from the
new CPU hotplug code. Kudos to Lai for discovering all of them and
providing fixes.
* Atomicity bug when clearing a flag and setting another. The two
operation should have been atomic but wasn't. This bug has existed
for a long time but is unlikely to have actually happened. Fix is
safe. Marked for -stable.
* If CPU hotplug cycles happen back-to-back before workers finish the
previous cycle, the states could get out of sync and it could get
stuck. Fixed by waiting for workers to complete before finishing
hotplug cycle.
* While CPU hotplug is in progress, idle workers could be depleted
which can then lead to deadlock. I think both happening together
is highly unlikely but still better to fix it and the fix isn't too
scary.
There's another workqueue related regression which reported a few days
ago:
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47301
It's a bit of head scratcher but there is a semi-reliable reproduce
case, so I'm hoping to resolve it soonish."
* 'for-3.6-fixes' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/wq:
workqueue: fix possible idle worker depletion across CPU hotplug
workqueue: restore POOL_MANAGING_WORKERS
workqueue: fix possible deadlock in idle worker rebinding
workqueue: move WORKER_REBIND clearing in rebind_workers() to the end of the function
workqueue: UNBOUND -> REBIND morphing in rebind_workers() should be atomic
-rw-r--r-- | kernel/workqueue.c | 110 |
1 files changed, 89 insertions, 21 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c index 692d97628a10..1e1373bcb3e3 100644 --- a/kernel/workqueue.c +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c @@ -66,6 +66,7 @@ enum { /* pool flags */ POOL_MANAGE_WORKERS = 1 << 0, /* need to manage workers */ + POOL_MANAGING_WORKERS = 1 << 1, /* managing workers */ /* worker flags */ WORKER_STARTED = 1 << 0, /* started */ @@ -652,7 +653,7 @@ static bool need_to_manage_workers(struct worker_pool *pool) /* Do we have too many workers and should some go away? */ static bool too_many_workers(struct worker_pool *pool) { - bool managing = mutex_is_locked(&pool->manager_mutex); + bool managing = pool->flags & POOL_MANAGING_WORKERS; int nr_idle = pool->nr_idle + managing; /* manager is considered idle */ int nr_busy = pool->nr_workers - nr_idle; @@ -1326,6 +1327,15 @@ static void idle_worker_rebind(struct worker *worker) /* we did our part, wait for rebind_workers() to finish up */ wait_event(gcwq->rebind_hold, !(worker->flags & WORKER_REBIND)); + + /* + * rebind_workers() shouldn't finish until all workers passed the + * above WORKER_REBIND wait. Tell it when done. + */ + spin_lock_irq(&worker->pool->gcwq->lock); + if (!--worker->idle_rebind->cnt) + complete(&worker->idle_rebind->done); + spin_unlock_irq(&worker->pool->gcwq->lock); } /* @@ -1396,12 +1406,15 @@ retry: /* set REBIND and kick idle ones, we'll wait for these later */ for_each_worker_pool(pool, gcwq) { list_for_each_entry(worker, &pool->idle_list, entry) { + unsigned long worker_flags = worker->flags; + if (worker->flags & WORKER_REBIND) continue; - /* morph UNBOUND to REBIND */ - worker->flags &= ~WORKER_UNBOUND; - worker->flags |= WORKER_REBIND; + /* morph UNBOUND to REBIND atomically */ + worker_flags &= ~WORKER_UNBOUND; + worker_flags |= WORKER_REBIND; + ACCESS_ONCE(worker->flags) = worker_flags; idle_rebind.cnt++; worker->idle_rebind = &idle_rebind; @@ -1419,25 +1432,15 @@ retry: goto retry; } - /* - * All idle workers are rebound and waiting for %WORKER_REBIND to - * be cleared inside idle_worker_rebind(). Clear and release. - * Clearing %WORKER_REBIND from this foreign context is safe - * because these workers are still guaranteed to be idle. - */ - for_each_worker_pool(pool, gcwq) - list_for_each_entry(worker, &pool->idle_list, entry) - worker->flags &= ~WORKER_REBIND; - - wake_up_all(&gcwq->rebind_hold); - - /* rebind busy workers */ + /* all idle workers are rebound, rebind busy workers */ for_each_busy_worker(worker, i, pos, gcwq) { struct work_struct *rebind_work = &worker->rebind_work; + unsigned long worker_flags = worker->flags; - /* morph UNBOUND to REBIND */ - worker->flags &= ~WORKER_UNBOUND; - worker->flags |= WORKER_REBIND; + /* morph UNBOUND to REBIND atomically */ + worker_flags &= ~WORKER_UNBOUND; + worker_flags |= WORKER_REBIND; + ACCESS_ONCE(worker->flags) = worker_flags; if (test_and_set_bit(WORK_STRUCT_PENDING_BIT, work_data_bits(rebind_work))) @@ -1449,6 +1452,34 @@ retry: worker->scheduled.next, work_color_to_flags(WORK_NO_COLOR)); } + + /* + * All idle workers are rebound and waiting for %WORKER_REBIND to + * be cleared inside idle_worker_rebind(). Clear and release. + * Clearing %WORKER_REBIND from this foreign context is safe + * because these workers are still guaranteed to be idle. + * + * We need to make sure all idle workers passed WORKER_REBIND wait + * in idle_worker_rebind() before returning; otherwise, workers can + * get stuck at the wait if hotplug cycle repeats. + */ + idle_rebind.cnt = 1; + INIT_COMPLETION(idle_rebind.done); + + for_each_worker_pool(pool, gcwq) { + list_for_each_entry(worker, &pool->idle_list, entry) { + worker->flags &= ~WORKER_REBIND; + idle_rebind.cnt++; + } + } + + wake_up_all(&gcwq->rebind_hold); + + if (--idle_rebind.cnt) { + spin_unlock_irq(&gcwq->lock); + wait_for_completion(&idle_rebind.done); + spin_lock_irq(&gcwq->lock); + } } static struct worker *alloc_worker(void) @@ -1794,9 +1825,45 @@ static bool manage_workers(struct worker *worker) struct worker_pool *pool = worker->pool; bool ret = false; - if (!mutex_trylock(&pool->manager_mutex)) + if (pool->flags & POOL_MANAGING_WORKERS) return ret; + pool->flags |= POOL_MANAGING_WORKERS; + + /* + * To simplify both worker management and CPU hotplug, hold off + * management while hotplug is in progress. CPU hotplug path can't + * grab %POOL_MANAGING_WORKERS to achieve this because that can + * lead to idle worker depletion (all become busy thinking someone + * else is managing) which in turn can result in deadlock under + * extreme circumstances. Use @pool->manager_mutex to synchronize + * manager against CPU hotplug. + * + * manager_mutex would always be free unless CPU hotplug is in + * progress. trylock first without dropping @gcwq->lock. + */ + if (unlikely(!mutex_trylock(&pool->manager_mutex))) { + spin_unlock_irq(&pool->gcwq->lock); + mutex_lock(&pool->manager_mutex); + /* + * CPU hotplug could have happened while we were waiting + * for manager_mutex. Hotplug itself can't handle us + * because manager isn't either on idle or busy list, and + * @gcwq's state and ours could have deviated. + * + * As hotplug is now excluded via manager_mutex, we can + * simply try to bind. It will succeed or fail depending + * on @gcwq's current state. Try it and adjust + * %WORKER_UNBOUND accordingly. + */ + if (worker_maybe_bind_and_lock(worker)) + worker->flags &= ~WORKER_UNBOUND; + else + worker->flags |= WORKER_UNBOUND; + + ret = true; + } + pool->flags &= ~POOL_MANAGE_WORKERS; /* @@ -1806,6 +1873,7 @@ static bool manage_workers(struct worker *worker) ret |= maybe_destroy_workers(pool); ret |= maybe_create_worker(pool); + pool->flags &= ~POOL_MANAGING_WORKERS; mutex_unlock(&pool->manager_mutex); return ret; } |