[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y90V1E9KP785ALMs@alley>
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2023 15:10:28 +0100
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
Michal Koutny <mkoutny@...e.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/5] workqueue: Warn when a new worker could not be created
On Thu 2023-02-02 13:30:39, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 02:45:40PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > +static __printf(2, 3) __cold
> > +void __print_create_worker_failure(long err, const char *fmt, ...)
> > +{
> > + spin_lock_irq(&create_worker_failed_lock);
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Report potentially repeated failures only once during a stall.
> > + * Otherwise, it might be noisy. Also slow serial console drivers
> > + * touch watchdogs so that more frequent messages would prevent
> > + * reaching the watchdog thresh.
> > + */
> > + if (!create_worker_failed) {
> > + va_list args;
> > +
> > + va_start(args, fmt);
> > + vprintk(fmt, args);
> > + va_end(args);
> > + }
> > +
> > + create_worker_failed++;
> > +
> > + spin_unlock_irq(&create_worker_failed_lock);
> > +}
>
> That's pretty elaborate.
Yeah, I am not super happy with it either.
> Why not just use printk_ratelimited()?
The default printk_ratelimited() is not usable because it uses:
#define DEFAULT_RATELIMIT_INTERVAL (5 * HZ)
#define DEFAULT_RATELIMIT_BURST 10
It allows 10 messages per 5 seconds. It would be still too noisy.
maybe_create_worker() tries to create a new worker every second.
And more importantly, it would break both softlockup and workqueue
watchdogs. See touch_nmi_watchdog() in serial8250_console_write().
By other words, it would break both softlockup and workqueue watchdogs.
A solution would be to use a custom printk_ratelimited_wq() that would
allow printing one message per 2 * wq_watchdog_thresh.
Something like:
#define printk_ratelimited_wq(fmt, ...) \
({ \
static DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE(_rs, 60 * HZ, 1); \
\
if (__ratelimit(&_rs)) \
printk(fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__); \
})
I admit that it is much easier than __print_create_worker_failure().
The only problem might be that wq_watchdog_thresh might be modified
at runtime. But it can be solved by sharing the same
struct ratelimit_state rs in all printk_ratelimited_wq() calls
and updating it together with wq_watchdog_thresh.
Would you prefer the custom printk_ratelimited_wq(), please?
Best Regards,
Petr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists