| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <534D02B0.1000801@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 17:58:08 +0800
From: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
CC: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>,
Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: [PATCH] workqueue: allow changing attributions of ordered workqueue
>From 534f1df8a5a03427b0fc382150fbd34e05648a28 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 17:52:19 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] workqueue: allow changing attributions of ordered workqueue
Allow changing ordered workqueue's cpumask
Allow changing ordered workqueue's nice value
Allow registering ordered workqueue to SYSFS
Still disallow changing ordered workqueue's max_active which breaks ordered guarantee
Still disallow changing ordered workqueue's no_numa which breaks ordered guarantee
Changing attributions will introduce new pwqs in a given workqueue, and
old implement doesn't have any solution to handle multi-pwqs on ordered workqueues,
so changing attributions for ordered workqueues is disallowed.
After I investigated several solutions which try to handle multi-pwqs on ordered workqueues,
I found the solution which reuse max_active are the simplest.
In this solution, the new introduced pwq's max_active is kept as *ZERO* until it become
the oldest pwq. Thus only one (the oldest) pwq is active, and ordered is guarantee.
This solution forces ordered on higher level while the non-reentrancy is also
forced. so we don't need to queue any work to its previous pool. And we shouldn't
do it. we must disallow any work repeatedly requeues itself back-to-back
which keeps the oldest pwq stay and make newest(if have) pwq starvation(non-active for ever).
Build test only.
This patch depends on previous patch:
workqueue: add __WQ_FREEZING and remove POOL_FREEZING
Frederic:
You can pick this patch to your updated patchset before
TJ apply it.
Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
---
kernel/workqueue.c | 66 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
1 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 92c9ada..fadcc4a 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -1350,8 +1350,14 @@ retry:
* If @work was previously on a different pool, it might still be
* running there, in which case the work needs to be queued on that
* pool to guarantee non-reentrancy.
+ *
+ * pwqs are guaranteed active orderly for ordered workqueue, and
+ * it guarantees non-reentrancy for works. So any work doesn't need
+ * to be queued on previous pool. And the works shouldn't be queued
+ * on previous pool, since we need to guarantee the prevous pwq
+ * releasable to avoid work-stavation on the newest pool.
*/
- last_pool = get_work_pool(work);
+ last_pool = wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED ? NULL : get_work_pool(work);
if (last_pool && last_pool != pwq->pool) {
struct worker *worker;
@@ -3179,6 +3185,10 @@ static ssize_t wq_numa_store(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
struct workqueue_attrs *attrs;
int v, ret;
+ /* Creating per-node pwqs breaks ordering guarantee. Keep no_numa = 1 */
+ if (WARN_ON(wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED))
+ return -EINVAL;
+
attrs = wq_sysfs_prep_attrs(wq);
if (!attrs)
return -ENOMEM;
@@ -3239,14 +3249,6 @@ int workqueue_sysfs_register(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
struct wq_device *wq_dev;
int ret;
- /*
- * Adjusting max_active or creating new pwqs by applyting
- * attributes breaks ordering guarantee. Disallow exposing ordered
- * workqueues.
- */
- if (WARN_ON(wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED))
- return -EINVAL;
-
wq->wq_dev = wq_dev = kzalloc(sizeof(*wq_dev), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!wq_dev)
return -ENOMEM;
@@ -3568,6 +3570,13 @@ static void rcu_free_pwq(struct rcu_head *rcu)
container_of(rcu, struct pool_workqueue, rcu));
}
+static struct pool_workqueue *oldest_pwq(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
+{
+ return list_last_entry(&wq->pwqs, struct pool_workqueue, pwqs_node);
+}
+
+static void pwq_adjust_max_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq);
+
/*
* Scheduled on system_wq by put_pwq() when an unbound pwq hits zero refcnt
* and needs to be destroyed.
@@ -3583,14 +3592,12 @@ static void pwq_unbound_release_workfn(struct work_struct *work)
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!(wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND)))
return;
- /*
- * Unlink @pwq. Synchronization against wq->mutex isn't strictly
- * necessary on release but do it anyway. It's easier to verify
- * and consistent with the linking path.
- */
mutex_lock(&wq->mutex);
list_del_rcu(&pwq->pwqs_node);
is_last = list_empty(&wq->pwqs);
+ /* try to active the oldest pwq when needed */
+ if (!is_last && (wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED))
+ pwq_adjust_max_active(oldest_pwq(wq));
mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex);
mutex_lock(&wq_pool_mutex);
@@ -3609,6 +3616,16 @@ static void pwq_unbound_release_workfn(struct work_struct *work)
}
}
+static bool pwq_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
+{
+ /* Only the oldest pwq is active in the ordered wq */
+ if (pwq->wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED)
+ return pwq == oldest_pwq(pwq->wq);
+
+ /* All pwqs in the non-ordered wq are active */
+ return true;
+}
+
/**
* pwq_adjust_max_active - update a pwq's max_active to the current setting
* @pwq: target pool_workqueue
@@ -3626,7 +3643,7 @@ static void pwq_adjust_max_active(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
spin_lock_irq(&pwq->pool->lock);
- if (!(wq->flags & __WQ_FREEZING)) {
+ if (!(wq->flags & __WQ_FREEZING) && pwq_active(pwq)) {
pwq->max_active = wq->saved_max_active;
while (!list_empty(&pwq->delayed_works) &&
@@ -3680,11 +3697,11 @@ static void link_pwq(struct pool_workqueue *pwq)
*/
pwq->work_color = wq->work_color;
+ /* link in @pwq on the head of &wq->pwqs */
+ list_add_rcu(&pwq->pwqs_node, &wq->pwqs);
+
/* sync max_active to the current setting */
pwq_adjust_max_active(pwq);
-
- /* link in @pwq */
- list_add_rcu(&pwq->pwqs_node, &wq->pwqs);
}
/* obtain a pool matching @attr and create a pwq associating the pool and @wq */
@@ -3810,8 +3827,8 @@ int apply_workqueue_attrs(struct workqueue_struct *wq,
if (WARN_ON(!(wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND)))
return -EINVAL;
- /* creating multiple pwqs breaks ordering guarantee */
- if (WARN_ON((wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED) && !list_empty(&wq->pwqs)))
+ /* creating multiple per-node pwqs breaks ordering guarantee */
+ if (WARN_ON((wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED) && !attrs->no_numa))
return -EINVAL;
pwq_tbl = kzalloc(wq_numa_tbl_len * sizeof(pwq_tbl[0]), GFP_KERNEL);
@@ -4004,7 +4021,7 @@ out_unlock:
static int alloc_and_link_pwqs(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
{
bool highpri = wq->flags & WQ_HIGHPRI;
- int cpu, ret;
+ int cpu;
if (!(wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND)) {
wq->cpu_pwqs = alloc_percpu(struct pool_workqueue);
@@ -4025,12 +4042,7 @@ static int alloc_and_link_pwqs(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
}
return 0;
} else if (wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED) {
- ret = apply_workqueue_attrs(wq, ordered_wq_attrs[highpri]);
- /* there should only be single pwq for ordering guarantee */
- WARN(!ret && (wq->pwqs.next != &wq->dfl_pwq->pwqs_node ||
- wq->pwqs.prev != &wq->dfl_pwq->pwqs_node),
- "ordering guarantee broken for workqueue %s\n", wq->name);
- return ret;
+ return apply_workqueue_attrs(wq, ordered_wq_attrs[highpri]);
} else {
return apply_workqueue_attrs(wq, unbound_std_wq_attrs[highpri]);
}
--
1.7.4.4
--
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