Added linux-block List which may also be relevant to this issue.
On 18 Aug 2020 12:58, Jim Baxter wrote:
> I am asking this question again to include the fs-devel list.
>
>
> We have issues with the workqueue of the kernel overloading the CPU 0
> when we we disconnect a USB stick.
>
> This results in other items on the shared workqueue being delayed by
> around 6.5 seconds with a default kernel configuration and 2.3 seconds
> on a config tailored for our RCar embedded platform.
>
>
>
> We first noticed this issue on custom hardware and we have recreated it
> on an RCar Starter Kit using a test module [1] to replicate the
> behaviour, the test module outputs any delays of greater then 9ms.
>
> To run the test we have a 4GB random file on a USB stick and perform
> the following test.
> The stick is mounted as R/O and we are copying data from the stick:
>
> - Mount the stick.
> mount -o ro,remount /dev/sda1
>
> - Load the Module:
> # taskset -c 0 modprobe latency-mon
>
> - Copy large amount of data from the stick:
> # dd if=/run/media/sda1/sample.txt of=/dev/zero
> [ 1437.517603] DELAY: 10
> 8388607+1 records in
> 8388607+1 records out
>
>
> - Disconnect the USB stick:
> [ 1551.796792] usb 2-1: USB disconnect, device number 2
> [ 1558.625517] DELAY: 6782
>
>
> The Delay output 6782 is in milliseconds.
>
>
>
> Using umount stops the issue occurring but is unfortunately not guaranteed
> in our particular system.
>
>
> From my analysis the hub_event workqueue kworker/0:1+usb thread uses around
> 98% of the CPU.
>
> I have traced the workqueue:workqueue_queue_work function while unplugging the USB
> and there is no particular workqueue function being executed a lot more then the
> others for the kworker/0:1+usb thread.
>
>
> Using perf I identified the hub_events workqueue was spending a lot of time in
> invalidate_partition(), I have included a cut down the captured data from perf in
> [2] which shows the additional functions where the kworker spends most of its time.
>
>
> I am aware there will be delays on the shared workqueue, are the delays
> we are seeing considered normal?
>
>
> Is there any way to mitigate or identify where the delay is?
> I am unsure if this is a memory or filesystem subsystem issue.
>
>
> Thank you for you help.
>
> Thanks,
> Jim Baxter
>
> [1] Test Module:
> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> /*
> * Simple WQ latency monitoring
> *
> * Copyright (C) 2020 Advanced Driver Information Technology.
> */
>
> #include <linux/init.h>
> #include <linux/ktime.h>
> #include <linux/module.h>
>
> #define PERIOD_MS 100
>
> static struct delayed_work wq;
> static u64 us_save;
>
> static void wq_cb(struct work_struct *work)
> {
> u64 us = ktime_to_us(ktime_get());
> u64 us_diff = us - us_save;
> u64 us_print = 0;
>
> if (!us_save)
> goto skip_print;
>
>
> us_print = us_diff / 1000 - PERIOD_MS;
> if (us_print > 9)
> pr_crit("DELAY: %lld\n", us_print);
>
> skip_print:
> us_save = us;
> schedule_delayed_work(&wq, msecs_to_jiffies(PERIOD_MS));
> }
>
> static int latency_mon_init(void)
> {
> us_save = 0;
> INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&wq, wq_cb);
> schedule_delayed_work(&wq, msecs_to_jiffies(PERIOD_MS));
>
> return 0;
> }
>
> static void latency_mon_exit(void)
> {
> cancel_delayed_work_sync(&wq);
> pr_info("%s\n", __func__);
> }
>
> module_init(latency_mon_init);
> module_exit(latency_mon_exit);
> MODULE_AUTHOR("Eugeniu Rosca <erosca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>");
> MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
>
>
> [2] perf trace:
> 95.22% 0.00% kworker/0:2-eve [kernel.kallsyms]
> |
> ---ret_from_fork
> kthread
> worker_thread
> |
> --95.15%--process_one_work
> |
> --94.99%--hub_event
> |
> --94.99%--usb_disconnect
> <snip>
> |
> --94.90%--invalidate_partition
> __invalidate_device
> |
> |--64.55%--invalidate_bdev
> | |
> | --64.13%--invalidate_mapping_pages
> | |
> | |--24.09%--invalidate_inode_page
> | | |
> | | --23.44%--remove_mapping
> | | |
> | | --23.20%--__remove_mapping
> | | |
> | | --21.90%--arch_local_irq_restore
> | |
> | |--22.44%--arch_local_irq_enable
> |
> --30.35%--shrink_dcache_sb
> <snip>
> |
> --30.17%--truncate_inode_pages_range
>
