[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aLiLJh4n80iKWzRe@slm.duckdns.org>
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2025 08:38:30 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
linux-rt-devel@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Clark Williams <clrkwllms@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] workqueue: Provide a handshake for canceling BH
workers
On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 03:30:08PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 12:38 AM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
> <bigeasy@...utronix.de> wrote:
>
> > @@ -4222,17 +4251,18 @@ static bool __flush_work(struct work_struct *work, bool from_cancel)
> > (data & WORK_OFFQ_BH)) {
> > /*
> > * On RT, prevent a live lock when %current preempted
> > - * soft interrupt processing or prevents ksoftirqd from
> > - * running by keeping flipping BH. If the BH work item
> > - * runs on a different CPU then this has no effect other
> > - * than doing the BH disable/enable dance for nothing.
> > - * This is copied from
> > - * kernel/softirq.c::tasklet_unlock_spin_wait().
> > + * soft interrupt processing by blocking on lock which
> > + * is owned by the thread invoking the callback.
> > */
> > while (!try_wait_for_completion(&barr.done)) {
> > if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT)) {
> > - local_bh_disable();
> > - local_bh_enable();
> > + struct worker_pool *pool;
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(&wq_pool_mutex);
> > + pool = get_work_pool(work);
> > + if (pool)
> > + workqueue_callback_cancel_wait_running(pool);
> > + mutex_unlock(&wq_pool_mutex);
>
> The goal is to avoid using a potentially sleeping function in
> __flush_work() for BH work items on PREEMPT_RT, but
> mutex_lock(&wq_pool_mutex) is not appropriate in this context.
>
> To obtain the pool of a work item, the preferred approach is to use
> rcu_read_lock() together with get_work_pool(work), as is done in
> start_flush_work().
Yeah, Sebastian, can you please switch it to rcu_read_lock()?
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists