linux-kernel - 回复: [PATCH] workqueue: Remove rcu_read_lock/unlock() in workqueue

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <BYAPR11MB26321D7D03F03A53B305967BFF819@BYAPR11MB2632.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 Feb 2021 09:13:48 +0000
From:   "Zhang, Qiang" <Qiang.Zhang@...driver.com>
To:     Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
        "paulmck@...nel.org" <paulmck@...nel.org>
CC:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: 回复: [PATCH] workqueue: Remove rcu_read_lock/unlock() in workqueue_congested()



________________________________________
发件人: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
发送时间: 2021年2月18日 23:17
收件人: Lai Jiangshan
抄送: Zhang, Qiang; Tejun Heo; Tejun Heo; LKML
主题: Re: [PATCH] workqueue: Remove rcu_read_lock/unlock() in workqueue_congested()

[Please note: This e-mail is from an EXTERNAL e-mail address]

On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 11:04:00AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> +CC Paul
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 7:58 PM <qiang.zhang@...driver.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Zqiang <qiang.zhang@...driver.com>
> >
> > The RCU read critical area already by preempt_disable/enable()
> > (equivalent to rcu_read_lock_sched/unlock_sched()) mark, so remove
> > rcu_read_lock/unlock().
>
> I think we can leave it which acks like document, especially
> workqueue_congested() is not performance crucial.  Either way
> is Ok for me.
>
>If the rcu_read_lock() is removed, should there be a comment saying >that
>it interacts with synchronize_rcu()?  Just in case one of the real-time
>guys figures out a way to get the job done without disabling >preemption...
>
>                                                        Thanx, Paul
>
> If it needs to be changed, please also do the same for
> rcu_read_lock() in wq_watchdog_timer_fn().
>
>
> And __queue_work() and try_to_grab_pending() also use local_irq_save()
> and rcu_read_lock() at the same time, but I don't know will these
> local_irq_save() be changed to raw_local_irq_save() in PREEMPT_RT.

The local_irq_save function is not change  in PREEMPT_RT system.

Thanks
Qiang

>
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Zqiang <qiang.zhang@...driver.com>
> > ---
> >  kernel/workqueue.c | 2 --
> >  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
> > index 0d150da252e8..c599835ad6c3 100644
> > --- a/kernel/workqueue.c
> > +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
> > @@ -4540,7 +4540,6 @@ bool workqueue_congested(int cpu, struct workqueue_struct *wq)
> >         struct pool_workqueue *pwq;
> >         bool ret;
> >
> > -       rcu_read_lock();
> >         preempt_disable();
> >
> >         if (cpu == WORK_CPU_UNBOUND)
> > @@ -4553,7 +4552,6 @@ bool workqueue_congested(int cpu, struct workqueue_struct *wq)
> >
> >         ret = !list_empty(&pwq->delayed_works);
> >         preempt_enable();
> > -       rcu_read_unlock();
> >
> >         return ret;
> >  }
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >