[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f3051cbb-313c-ba88-66c9-3f8f8d88d806@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:03:10 -0400
From: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Mike Stowell <mstowell@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] locking/rtmutex: Limit # of lock stealing for non-RT
waiters
On 7/6/22 09:59, Waiman Long wrote:
> Commit 48eb3f4fcfd3 ("locking/rtmutex: Implement equal priority lock
> stealing") allows unlimited number of lock stealing's for non-RT
> tasks. That can lead to lock starvation of non-RT top waiter tasks if
> there is a constant incoming stream of non-RT lockers. This can cause
> rcu_preempt self-detected stall or even task lockup in PREEMPT_RT kernel.
> For example,
>
> [77107.424943] rcu: INFO: rcu_preempt self-detected stall on CPU
> [ 1249.921363] INFO: task systemd:2178 blocked for more than 622 seconds.
>
> Avoiding this problem and ensuring forward progress by limiting the
> number of times that a lock can be stolen from each waiter. This patch
> sets a threshold of 32. That number is arbitrary and can be changed
> if needed.
>
> Fixes: 48eb3f4fcfd3 ("locking/rtmutex: Implement equal priority lock stealing")
> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
> ---
> kernel/locking/rtmutex.c | 9 ++++++---
> kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h | 8 ++++++++
> 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> [v3: Increase threshold to 32 and add rcu_preempt self-detected stall]
Note that I decided to increase the threshold to 32 from 10 to reduce
the potential performance impact of this change, if any. We also found
out that this patch can fix some of the rcu_preempt self-detected stall
problems that we saw with the PREEMPT_RT kernel. So I added that
information in the patch description.
Cheers,
Longman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists