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
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180730154424.GG1206094@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com>
Date:   Mon, 30 Jul 2018 08:44:24 -0700
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:     Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
Cc:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm,page_alloc: PF_WQ_WORKER threads must sleep at
 should_reclaim_retry().

Hello,

On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 12:25:04AM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> WQ_MEM_RECLAIM guarantees that "struct task_struct" is preallocated. But
> WQ_MEM_RECLAIM does not guarantee that the pending work is started as soon
> as an item was queued. Same rule applies to both WQ_MEM_RECLAIM workqueues 
> and !WQ_MEM_RECLAIM workqueues regarding when to start a pending work (i.e.
> when schedule_timeout_*() is called).
> 
> Is this correct?

WQ_MEM_RECLAIM guarantees that there's always gonna exist at least one
kworker running the workqueue.  But all per-cpu kworkers are subject
to concurrency limiting execution - ie. if there are any per-cpu
actively running on a cpu, no futher kworkers will be scheduled.

> >              We can add timeout mechanism to workqueue so that it
> > kicks off other kworkers if one of them is in running state for too
> > long, but idk, if there's an indefinite busy loop condition in kernel
> > threads, we really should get rid of them and hung task watchdog is
> > pretty effective at finding these cases (at least with preemption
> > disabled).
> 
> Currently the page allocator has a path which can loop forever with
> only cond_resched().

Yeah, workqueue can choke on things like that and kthread indefinitely
busy looping doesn't do anybody any good.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ