On 1/18/2022 3:50 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
On Mon 17 Jan 09:09 CST 2022, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
Hi,
There could be a situation there is too much load(of tasks which is affined
As in "it's theoretically possible" or "we run into this issue all the
time"?
During recovery we notify all the remoteproc kernel clients about the
crash and if one of the notification gets stuck
for more than 20-30s we ideally inject panic . During analysis, We saw
that just because of the load(stress testing) on the
core we are not able to proceed. would be good to avail this work to run
on different CPU.
to particular core) on a core on which rproc
recovery thread will not get a chance to run with no reason but the load. If
we make this queue unbound, then this work
can run on any core.
Kindly Let me if i can post a proper patch for this like below.
--- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
+++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
@@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ static int rproc_release_carveout(struct rproc *rproc,
/* Unique indices for remoteproc devices */
static DEFINE_IDA(rproc_dev_index);
+static struct workqueue_struct *rproc_recovery_wq;
static const char * const rproc_crash_names[] = {
[RPROC_MMUFAULT] = "mmufault",
@@ -2487,7 +2488,7 @@ void rproc_report_crash(struct rproc *rproc, enum
rproc_crash_type type)
rproc->name, rproc_crash_to_string(type));
/* Have a worker handle the error; ensure system is not suspended */
- queue_work(system_freezable_wq, &rproc->crash_handler);
+ queue_work(rproc_recovery_wq, &rproc->crash_handler);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(rproc_report_crash);
@@ -2532,6 +2533,12 @@ static void __exit rproc_exit_panic(void)
static int __init remoteproc_init(void)
{
+ rproc_recovery_wq = alloc_workqueue("rproc_recovery_wq", WQ_UNBOUND
|
+ WQ_HIGHPRI | WQ_FREEZABLE |
WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE, 0);
Afaict this is not only a separate work queue, but a high priority, "cpu
intensive" work queue. Does that really represent the urgency of getting
the recovery under way?
Adding a WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE(no use) here is a blunder from my end, will
remove this.
Thanks,
-Mukesh
Regards,
Bjorn
+ if (!rproc_recovery_wq) {
+ pr_err("creation of rproc_recovery_wq failed\n");
+ }
+
Thanks,
Mukesh
