| 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: <548E728E.8090707@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:02 +0900
From: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>,
"Gu, Zheng" <guz.fnst@...fujitsu.com>,
tangchen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] workqueue: handle change in cpu-node relationship.
(2014/12/15 14:19), Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> On 12/15/2014 12:04 PM, Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote:
>> (2014/12/15 12:34), Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>>> On 12/15/2014 10:55 AM, Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote:
>>>> (2014/12/15 11:48), Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>>>>> On 12/15/2014 10:20 AM, Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote:
>>>>>> (2014/12/15 11:12), Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>>>>>>> On 12/14/2014 12:38 AM, Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote:
>>>>>>>> Although workqueue detects relationship between cpu<->node at boot,
>>>>>>>> it is finally determined in cpu_up().
>>>>>>>> This patch tries to update pool->node using online status of cpus.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1. When a node goes down, clear per-cpu pool's node attr.
>>>>>>>> 2. When a cpu comes up, update per-cpu pool's node attr.
>>>>>>>> 3. When a cpu comes up, update possinle node cpumask workqueue is using for sched.
>>>>>>>> 4. Detect the best node for unbound pool's cpumask using the latest info.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>> kernel/workqueue.c | 67 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
>>>>>>>> index 07b4eb5..259b3ba 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/kernel/workqueue.c
>>>>>>>> +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
>>>>>>>> @@ -266,7 +266,8 @@ struct workqueue_struct {
>>>>>>>> static struct kmem_cache *pwq_cache;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> static cpumask_var_t *wq_numa_possible_cpumask;
>>>>>>>> - /* possible CPUs of each node */
>>>>>>>> + /* possible CPUs of each node initialized with possible info at boot.
>>>>>>>> + but modified at cpu hotplug to be adjusted to real info. */
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> static bool wq_disable_numa;
>>>>>>>> module_param_named(disable_numa, wq_disable_numa, bool, 0444);
>>>>>>>> @@ -3449,6 +3450,31 @@ static void put_unbound_pool(struct worker_pool *pool)
>>>>>>>> call_rcu_sched(&pool->rcu, rcu_free_pool);
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +/*
>>>>>>>> + * detect best node for given cpumask.
>>>>>>>> + */
>>>>>>>> +static int pool_detect_best_node(const struct cpumask *cpumask)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + int node, best, match, selected;
>>>>>>>> + static struct cpumask andmask; /* we're under mutex */
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + /* Is any node okay ? */
>>>>>>>> + if (!wq_numa_enabled ||
>>>>>>>> + cpumask_subset(cpu_online_mask, cpumask))
>>>>>>>> + return NUMA_NO_NODE;
>>>>>>>> + best = 0;
>>>>>>>> + selected = NUMA_NO_NODE;
>>>>>>>> + /* select a node which contains the most cpu of cpumask */
>>>>>>>> + for_each_node_state(node, N_ONLINE) {
>>>>>>>> + cpumask_and(&andmask, cpumask, cpumask_of_node(node));
>>>>>>>> + match = cpumask_weight(&andmask);
>>>>>>>> + if (match > best)
>>>>>>>> + selected = node;
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> + return selected;
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> /**
>>>>>>>> * get_unbound_pool - get a worker_pool with the specified attributes
>>>>>>>> * @attrs: the attributes of the worker_pool to get
>>>>>>>> @@ -3467,7 +3493,6 @@ static struct worker_pool *get_unbound_pool(const struct workqueue_attrs *attrs)
>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>> u32 hash = wqattrs_hash(attrs);
>>>>>>>> struct worker_pool *pool;
>>>>>>>> - int node;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> lockdep_assert_held(&wq_pool_mutex);
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> @@ -3492,17 +3517,7 @@ static struct worker_pool *get_unbound_pool(const struct workqueue_attrs *attrs)
>>>>>>>> * 'struct workqueue_attrs' comments for detail.
>>>>>>>> */
>>>>>>>> pool->attrs->no_numa = false;
>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>> - /* if cpumask is contained inside a NUMA node, we belong to that node */
>>>>>>>> - if (wq_numa_enabled) {
>>>>>>>> - for_each_node(node) {
>>>>>>>> - if (cpumask_subset(pool->attrs->cpumask,
>>>>>>>> - wq_numa_possible_cpumask[node])) {
>>>>>>>> - pool->node = node;
>>>>>>>> - break;
>>>>>>>> - }
>>>>>>>> - }
>>>>>>>> - }
>>>>>>>> + pool->node = pool_detect_best_node(pool->attrs->cpumask);
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> if (worker_pool_assign_id(pool) < 0)
>>>>>>>> goto fail;
>>>>>>>> @@ -4567,7 +4582,7 @@ static int workqueue_cpu_up_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb,
>>>>>>>> int cpu = (unsigned long)hcpu;
>>>>>>>> struct worker_pool *pool;
>>>>>>>> struct workqueue_struct *wq;
>>>>>>>> - int pi;
>>>>>>>> + int pi, node;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> switch (action & ~CPU_TASKS_FROZEN) {
>>>>>>>> case CPU_UP_PREPARE:
>>>>>>>> @@ -4583,6 +4598,16 @@ static int workqueue_cpu_up_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb,
>>>>>>>> case CPU_ONLINE:
>>>>>>>> mutex_lock(&wq_pool_mutex);
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> + /* now cpu <-> node info is established, update the info. */
>>>>>>>> + if (!wq_disable_numa) {
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> + for_each_node_state(node, N_POSSIBLE)
>>>>>>>> + cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu,
>>>>>>>> + wq_numa_possible_cpumask[node]);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The wq code try to reuse the origin pwqs/pools when the node still have cpu online.
>>>>>>> these 3 lines of code will cause the origin pwqs/pools be on the road of dying, and
>>>>>>> create a new set of pwqs/pools.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> because the result of wq_calc_node_cpumask() changes ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you mean some comment should be added here ? or explaination for your reply for [3/4] ?
>>>>>
>>>>> this fix [4/4] breaks the original design.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm sorry that I can't understand what this patch breaks.
>>>
>>> the pwqs/pools should be kept if the node still have cpu online.
>>
>> So, the fix's grand design should be
>>
>> 1. drop old pwq/pools only at node offline.
>> 2. set proper pool->node based on online node info.
>> 3. update pool->node of per-cpu-pool at cpu ONLINE.
>>
>> Hm. (1) is done because cpumask_of_node() turns to be zero-filled
>> after all cpus on a node offlined.
>>
>> But, cpu-to-node relationship cannot be available until a cpu get onlined.
>> It changes at every cpu onlining. So, at node online, refleshing cpumasks
>
> It changes at every cpu being added which earlier than any cpu of the node will be online.
>
>> of workqueues only after _all_ cpus on node are onlined seems to be the only way
>
> When _any_ cpu on the new node is onlining, _add_ cpus of the node were *added*, which means
> all cpu_to_node()s of the all cpus on new node ware updated.
>
Thank you, I misuderstood that.
> so we can check the updated information when up online. This is what my patchset did.
>
>> but I'm not sure how to get a mask of possible cpus on a node.
>
> like this:
>
> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> + node = cpu_to_node(node);
> + if (node == new_node)
> + cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, wq_numa_possible_cpumask[new_node]);
> + }
>
Okay, I talked with Ishimatu-san and get some more knowledege.
let me clarify. not at cpu hotplug,
(A) At physical cpu hot add, cpu <-> node relationship is established.
(B) If an exisitng cpu was on a memory less node, cpu<->node relationship may change
at CPU_ONLINE.
Because (2) will not change topology of cpuids, this doesn't affect cpumask for sched.
So, we just need to handle following.
1. update pc->node if necessary.
2. update wq_numa_possible_mask[] at physical cpu hot-add.
Leave wq_numa_possible_mask as it is for case (B) because the change doesn't affect
the affinity group of cpus. no affects to cpumask.
I'll cook a patch and do a test.
Thanks,
-Kame
--
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