| To: | Tony Luck <tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool |
| From: | Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:32:21 -0700 |
| Cc: | Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, joshhunt00@xxxxxxxxx, axboe@xxxxxxxxx, rni@xxxxxxxxxx, vgoyal@xxxxxxxxxx, vwadekar@xxxxxxxxxx, herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-crypto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, swhiteho@xxxxxxxxxx, bpm@xxxxxxx, elder@xxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, marcel@xxxxxxxxxxxx, gustavo@xxxxxxxxxxx, johan.hedberg@xxxxxxxxx, linux-bluetooth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, martin.petersen@xxxxxxxxxx |
| Dkim-signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=XHzucm/PsBk8EkNPc4j5zAobjX3SSsQN3Hi6eJHu67U=; b=nvO0VDALHG5nH4VIDDWKT7OUq/wFsJlC/gfPciEnmgYyE6LZ98ZJPryxTZAmwnLRL5 z2DzavlkvyeqMljAeOe2xASpJFu0/CkDakIs5avHnTeXmeP1UzULpjiKsMqrdfP/SloQ X883kqKxGS71A8MZLGbpqD4H+oPzHiTSDWT70zTcHG+LdC+3IM8Mc+NuzAOJ603EXKl0 9v+hFUsJ3wtvnxHGiMLj2nBQqVwboRdq4n3WDiDb9yoE6PjaSioxQA5KJCHuKX7h4YBm pzFzc9oJ/ySNDU2bA9yItnxpLmSVLQ6sCEgurWbdHeNMnSgKrZd7N5bmmHSN1GNPOipg Z7yQ== |
| In-reply-to: | <CA+8MBb+ghRpmtrk=t5-6MqrPMZt+a69UoAWaubyKBeptGdBrWA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <1341859315-17759-7-git-send-email-tj@xxxxxxxxxx> <20120712130648.GA19214@localhost> <20120712170519.GA20167@xxxxxxxxxx> <20120712214514.GD20167@xxxxxxxxxx> <CA+8MBb+ghRpmtrk=t5-6MqrPMZt+a69UoAWaubyKBeptGdBrWA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | Tejun Heo <htejun@xxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) |
Hello, Tony.
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 03:16:30PM -0700, Tony Luck wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I was wrong and am now dazed and confused. That's from
> > init_workqueues() where only cpu0 is running. How the hell did
> > nr_running manage to become non-zero at that point? Can you please
> > apply the following patch and report the boot log? Thank you.
>
> Patch applied on top of next-20120712 (which still has the same problem).
Can you please try the following debug patch instead? Yours is
different from Fengguang's.
Thanks a lot!
---
kernel/workqueue.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -699,8 +699,10 @@ void wq_worker_waking_up(struct task_str
{
struct worker *worker = kthread_data(task);
- if (!(worker->flags & WORKER_NOT_RUNNING))
+ if (!(worker->flags & WORKER_NOT_RUNNING)) {
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(cpu != worker->pool->gcwq->cpu);
atomic_inc(get_pool_nr_running(worker->pool));
+ }
}
/**
@@ -730,6 +732,7 @@ struct task_struct *wq_worker_sleeping(s
/* this can only happen on the local cpu */
BUG_ON(cpu != raw_smp_processor_id());
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(cpu != worker->pool->gcwq->cpu);
/*
* The counterpart of the following dec_and_test, implied mb,
@@ -1212,9 +1215,30 @@ static void worker_enter_idle(struct wor
* between setting %WORKER_ROGUE and zapping nr_running, the
* warning may trigger spuriously. Check iff trustee is idle.
*/
- WARN_ON_ONCE(gcwq->trustee_state == TRUSTEE_DONE &&
- pool->nr_workers == pool->nr_idle &&
- atomic_read(get_pool_nr_running(pool)));
+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(gcwq->trustee_state == TRUSTEE_DONE &&
+ pool->nr_workers == pool->nr_idle &&
+ atomic_read(get_pool_nr_running(pool)))) {
+ static bool once = false;
+ int cpu;
+
+ if (once)
+ return;
+ once = true;
+
+ printk("XXX nr_running mismatch on gcwq[%d] pool[%ld]\n",
+ gcwq->cpu, pool - gcwq->pools);
+
+ for_each_gcwq_cpu(cpu) {
+ gcwq = get_gcwq(cpu);
+
+ printk("XXX gcwq[%d] flags=0x%x\n", gcwq->cpu,
gcwq->flags);
+ for_each_worker_pool(pool, gcwq)
+ printk("XXX gcwq[%d] pool[%ld] nr_workers=%d
nr_idle=%d nr_running=%d\n",
+ gcwq->cpu, pool - gcwq->pools,
+ pool->nr_workers, pool->nr_idle,
+ atomic_read(get_pool_nr_running(pool)));
+ }
+ }
}
/**
@@ -3855,6 +3879,10 @@ static int __init init_workqueues(void)
for (i = 0; i < BUSY_WORKER_HASH_SIZE; i++)
INIT_HLIST_HEAD(&gcwq->busy_hash[i]);
+ if (cpu != WORK_CPU_UNBOUND)
+ printk("XXX cpu=%d gcwq=%p base=%p\n", cpu, gcwq,
+ per_cpu_ptr(&pool_nr_running, cpu));
+
for_each_worker_pool(pool, gcwq) {
pool->gcwq = gcwq;
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pool->worklist);
@@ -3868,6 +3896,10 @@ static int __init init_workqueues(void)
(unsigned long)pool);
ida_init(&pool->worker_ida);
+
+ printk("XXX cpu=%d nr_running=%d @ %p\n", gcwq->cpu,
+ atomic_read(get_pool_nr_running(pool)),
+ get_pool_nr_running(pool));
}
gcwq->trustee_state = TRUSTEE_DONE;
|
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Tony Luck |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH 2/2] xfs: do not call xfs_bdstrat_cb in xfs_buf_iodone_callbacks, Ben Myers |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Tony Luck |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Tony Luck |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |