[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ed780193-98b4-43ec-8062-be26681f6161@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 10:28:05 +0800
From: Wenchao Hao <haowenchao22@...il.com>
To: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...mlin.com>, Wenchao Hao <haowenchao2@...wei.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, neelx@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] workqueue: Fix rescuer task's name truncated
On 2024/5/11 22:15, Aaron Tomlin wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 02:21:04AM GMT, Wenchao Hao wrote:
>> Task comm of task is limitted to 16, prefix "kworker/R-" is added for
>> rescuer worker's task, which cause most task name is truncated as
>> following:
>>
>> root 81 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? I< 11:18 0:00 [kworker/R-xprti]
>> root 82 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? I< 11:18 0:00 [kworker/R-cfg80]
>> root 85 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? I< 11:18 0:00 [kworker/R-nfsio]
>> root 86 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? I< 11:18 0:00 [kworker/R-xfsal]
>> root 87 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? I< 11:18 0:00 [kworker/R-xfs_m]
>> root 88 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? I< 11:18 0:00 [kworker/R-acpi_]
>> root 93 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? I< 11:18 0:00 [kworker/R-iscsi]
>> root 95 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? I< 11:18 0:00 [kworker/R-scsi_]
>> root 97 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? I< 11:18 0:00 [kworker/R-scsi_]
>> root 99 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? I< 11:18 0:00 [kworker/R-scsi_]
>>
>> I want to fix this issue by split rescuer name to 2 part like other
>> kworker, the normal part is "kworker/R" which is set to task_struct's comm,
>> another part is wq->name which is added to kworker's desc. These 2 parts
>> would be merged in wq_worker_comm().
>>
>> Fixes: b6a46f7263bd ("workqueue: Rename rescuer kworker")
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Wenchao Hao <haowenchao2@...wei.com>
>> ---
>> kernel/workqueue.c | 6 +++++-
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
>> index 0066c8f6c154..0ce9e8597a4d 100644
>> --- a/kernel/workqueue.c
>> +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
>> @@ -5430,7 +5430,7 @@ static int init_rescuer(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
>> }
>>
>> rescuer->rescue_wq = wq;
>> - rescuer->task = kthread_create(rescuer_thread, rescuer, "kworker/R-%s", wq->name);
>> + rescuer->task = kthread_create(rescuer_thread, rescuer, "kworker/R");
>> if (IS_ERR(rescuer->task)) {
>> ret = PTR_ERR(rescuer->task);
>> pr_err("workqueue: Failed to create a rescuer kthread for wq \"%s\": %pe",
>> @@ -5439,6 +5439,8 @@ static int init_rescuer(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
>> return ret;
>> }
>>
>> + snprintf(rescuer->desc, sizeof(rescuer->desc), "%s", wq->name);
>> +
>> wq->rescuer = rescuer;
>> if (wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND)
>> kthread_bind_mask(rescuer->task, wq_unbound_cpumask);
>> @@ -6289,6 +6291,8 @@ void wq_worker_comm(char *buf, size_t size, struct task_struct *task)
>> worker->desc);
>> }
>> raw_spin_unlock_irq(&pool->lock);
>> + } else if (worker->desc[0] != '\0') {
>> + scnprintf(buf + off, size - off, "-%s", worker->desc);
>> }
>> }
>>
>> --
>
> Reviewed-by: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...mlin.com>
>
Thanks for your review, I would add your Reviewed-by and remove the RFC
tags, then post again.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists