[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200521055639.GA2337399@kroah.com>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 07:56:39 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@...eaurora.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Vinayak Menon <vinmenon@...eaurora.org>,
Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Steven Rostedt (VMware)" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Liang Chen <cl@...k-chips.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kthread: Use TASK_IDLE state for newly created kernel
threads
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 07:05:44AM +0530, Pavan Kondeti wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 08:18:58PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 05:25:09PM +0530, Pavankumar Kondeti wrote:
> > > When kernel threads are created for later use, they will be in
> > > TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE state until they are woken up. This results
> > > in increased loadavg and false hung task reports. To fix this,
> > > use TASK_IDLE state instead of TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE when
> > > a kernel thread schedules out for the first time.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Pavankumar Kondeti <pkondeti@...eaurora.org>
> > > ---
> > > kernel/kthread.c | 6 +++---
> > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/kernel/kthread.c b/kernel/kthread.c
> > > index bfbfa48..b74ed8e 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/kthread.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/kthread.c
> > > @@ -250,7 +250,7 @@ static int kthread(void *_create)
> > > current->vfork_done = &self->exited;
> > >
> > > /* OK, tell user we're spawned, wait for stop or wakeup */
> > > - __set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
> > > + __set_current_state(TASK_IDLE);
> > > create->result = current;
> > > /*
> > > * Thread is going to call schedule(), do not preempt it,
> > > @@ -428,7 +428,7 @@ static void __kthread_bind(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int cpu, long state)
> > >
> > > void kthread_bind_mask(struct task_struct *p, const struct cpumask *mask)
> > > {
> > > - __kthread_bind_mask(p, mask, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
> > > + __kthread_bind_mask(p, mask, TASK_IDLE);
> > > }
> > >
> > > /**
> > > @@ -442,7 +442,7 @@ void kthread_bind_mask(struct task_struct *p, const struct cpumask *mask)
> > > */
> > > void kthread_bind(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int cpu)
> > > {
> > > - __kthread_bind(p, cpu, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
> > > + __kthread_bind(p, cpu, TASK_IDLE);
> > > }
> > > EXPORT_SYMBOL(kthread_bind);
> >
> > It's as if people never read mailing lists:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/r/DM6PR11MB3531D3B164357B2DC476102DDFC90@DM6PR11MB3531.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
> >
> > Given that this is an identical resend of the previous patch, why are
> > you doing so, and what has changed since that original rejection?
> >
> I did not know that it is attempted before. Thanks for pointing to the
> previous discussion.
>
> We have seen hung task reports from customers and it is due to a downstream
> change which create bunch of kernel threads for later use.
Do you have a pointer to that specific change?
> From Peter's reply, I understood that one must wake up the kthread
> after creation and put it in INTERRUPTIBLE sleep. I will pass on the
> message.
Just go fix that code, it sounds like it's in your tree already :)
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists