3.10-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>
commit 8a2b75384444488fc4f2cbb9f0921b6a0794838f upstream.
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@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reported-by: Libin <huawei.libin@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
kernel/workqueue.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -295,6 +295,9 @@ static DEFINE_HASHTABLE(unbound_pool_has
/* 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;
@@ -4059,7 +4062,7 @@ 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);
@@ -4079,6 +4082,13 @@ static int alloc_and_link_pwqs(struct wo
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]);
}
@@ -4990,13 +5000,23 @@ 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);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html