diff options
author | Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> | 2013-09-05 12:30:04 -0400 |
---|---|---|
committer | Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> | 2013-11-22 18:14:02 -0500 |
commit | 8a2b75384444488fc4f2cbb9f0921b6a0794838f (patch) | |
tree | c4b39daad8de264be08beec77621048e9b9fb9ed /kernel | |
parent | 91151228065354a050fd0d190aefdd662a0580aa (diff) | |
download | linux-stable-8a2b75384444488fc4f2cbb9f0921b6a0794838f.tar.gz linux-stable-8a2b75384444488fc4f2cbb9f0921b6a0794838f.tar.bz2 linux-stable-8a2b75384444488fc4f2cbb9f0921b6a0794838f.zip |
workqueue: fix ordered workqueues in NUMA setups
An ordered workqueue implements execution ordering by using single
pool_workqueue with max_active == 1. On a given pool_workqueue, work
items are processed in FIFO order and limiting max_active to 1
enforces the queued work items to be processed one by one.
Unfortunately, 4c16bd327c ("workqueue: implement NUMA affinity for
unbound workqueues") accidentally broke this guarantee by applying
NUMA affinity to ordered workqueues too. On NUMA setups, an ordered
workqueue would end up with separate pool_workqueues for different
nodes. Each pool_workqueue still limits max_active to 1 but multiple
work items may be executed concurrently and out of order depending on
which node they are queued to.
Fix it by using dedicated ordered_wq_attrs[] when creating ordered
workqueues. The new attrs match the unbound ones except that no_numa
is always set thus forcing all NUMA nodes to share the default
pool_workqueue.
While at it, add sanity check in workqueue creation path which
verifies that an ordered workqueues has only the default
pool_workqueue.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Reported-by: Libin <huawei.libin@huawei.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'kernel')
-rw-r--r-- | kernel/workqueue.c | 24 |
1 files changed, 22 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c index f8942429268b..bbb5e9832d85 100644 --- a/kernel/workqueue.c +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c @@ -305,6 +305,9 @@ static DEFINE_HASHTABLE(unbound_pool_hash, UNBOUND_POOL_HASH_ORDER); /* I: attributes used when instantiating standard unbound pools on demand */ static struct workqueue_attrs *unbound_std_wq_attrs[NR_STD_WORKER_POOLS]; +/* I: attributes used when instantiating ordered pools on demand */ +static struct workqueue_attrs *ordered_wq_attrs[NR_STD_WORKER_POOLS]; + struct workqueue_struct *system_wq __read_mostly; EXPORT_SYMBOL(system_wq); struct workqueue_struct *system_highpri_wq __read_mostly; @@ -4107,7 +4110,7 @@ out_unlock: static int alloc_and_link_pwqs(struct workqueue_struct *wq) { bool highpri = wq->flags & WQ_HIGHPRI; - int cpu; + int cpu, ret; if (!(wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND)) { wq->cpu_pwqs = alloc_percpu(struct pool_workqueue); @@ -4127,6 +4130,13 @@ static int alloc_and_link_pwqs(struct workqueue_struct *wq) mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex); } return 0; + } else if (wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED) { + ret = apply_workqueue_attrs(wq, ordered_wq_attrs[highpri]); + /* there should only be single pwq for ordering guarantee */ + WARN(!ret && (wq->pwqs.next != &wq->dfl_pwq->pwqs_node || + wq->pwqs.prev != &wq->dfl_pwq->pwqs_node), + "ordering guarantee broken for workqueue %s\n", wq->name); + return ret; } else { return apply_workqueue_attrs(wq, unbound_std_wq_attrs[highpri]); } @@ -5052,13 +5062,23 @@ static int __init init_workqueues(void) } } - /* create default unbound wq attrs */ + /* create default unbound and ordered wq attrs */ for (i = 0; i < NR_STD_WORKER_POOLS; i++) { struct workqueue_attrs *attrs; BUG_ON(!(attrs = alloc_workqueue_attrs(GFP_KERNEL))); attrs->nice = std_nice[i]; unbound_std_wq_attrs[i] = attrs; + + /* + * An ordered wq should have only one pwq as ordering is + * guaranteed by max_active which is enforced by pwqs. + * Turn off NUMA so that dfl_pwq is used for all nodes. + */ + BUG_ON(!(attrs = alloc_workqueue_attrs(GFP_KERNEL))); + attrs->nice = std_nice[i]; + attrs->no_numa = true; + ordered_wq_attrs[i] = attrs; } system_wq = alloc_workqueue("events", 0, 0); |