[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090131180347.GC5884@nowhere>
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 19:03:49 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] create workqueue threads only when needed
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 04:30:15PM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 01:17:11 +0100
> Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > While looking at the statistics from the workqueue tracer, I've been
> > suprised by the number of useless workqueues I had:
> >
> > CPU INSERTED EXECUTED NAME
> > | | | |
> >
> > * 0 0 kpsmoused
> > * 0 0 ata_aux
> > * 0 0 cqueue
> > * 0 0 kacpi_notify
> > * 0 0 kacpid
> > * 998 998 khelper
> > * 0 0 cpuset
> >
> > 1 0 0 hda0/1
> > 1 42 42 reiserfs/1
> > 1 0 0 scsi_tgtd/1
> > 1 0 0 aio/1
> > 1 0 0 ata/1
> > 1 193 193 kblockd/1
> > 1 0 0 kintegrityd/1
> > 1 4 4 work_on_cpu/1
> > 1 1244 1244 events/1
> >
> > 0 0 0 hda0/0
> > 0 63 63 reiserfs/0
> > 0 0 0 scsi_tgtd/0
> > 0 0 0 aio/0
> > 0 0 0 ata/0
> > 0 188 188 kblockd/0
> > 0 0 0 kintegrityd/0
> > 0 16 16 work_on_cpu/0
> > 0 1360 1360 events/0
> >
> >
> > All of the workqueues with 0 work inserted do nothing.
> > For several reasons:
> >
> > _ Unneeded built drivers for my system that create workqueue(s) when
> > they init _ Services which need their own workqueue, for several
> > reasons, but who receive very rare jobs (often never)
> > _ ...?
> >
> > And the result of git-grep create_singlethread_workqueue is even more
> > surprising.
> >
> > So I've started a patch which creates the workqueues by default
> > without thread except the kevents one.
> > They will have their thread created and started only when these
> > workqueues will receive a first work to do. This is performed by
> > submitting a task's creation work to the kevent workqueues which are
> > always there, and are the only one which have their thread started on
> > creation.
> >
> > The result after this patch:
> >
> > # CPU INSERTED EXECUTED NAME
> > # | | | |
> >
> > * 999 1000 khelper
> >
> > 1 5 6 reiserfs/1
> > 1 0 2 work_on_cpu/1
> > 1 86 87 kblockd/1
> > 1 14 16 work_on_cpu/1
> > 1 149 149 events/1
> >
> > 0 15 16 reiserfs/0
> > 0 85 86 kblockd/0
> > 0 146 146 events/0
> >
> >
> > Dropping 16 useless kernel threads in my system.
> > (Yes the inserted values are not synced with the executed one because
> > the tracers looses the first events. I just rewrote some parts to
> > make it work with this patch) .
> > I guess I will update this tracer to display the "shadow workqueues"
> > which have no threads too.
> >
> > I hadn't any problems until now with this patch but I think it needs
> > more testing, like with cpu hotplug, and some renaming for its
> > functions and structures... And I would like to receive some comments
> > and feelings before continuing. So this is just an RFC :-)
> >
>
> one thing to look at for work queues that never get work is to see if
> they are appropriate for the async function call interface
> (the only requirement for that is that they need to cope with calling
> inline in exceptional cases)
>
Hi Arjan,
There is one thing that make it hard to replace workqueues in such cases,
there is not guarantee the function will run in user context because of this
condition:
if (!async_enabled || !entry || atomic_read(&entry_count) > MAX_WORK)
I wanted to replace kpsmoused with an async function but I want to schedule
a slow work that can't be done from irq...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists