Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Merge branch 'for-4.13-fixes' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/k…
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
…ernel/git/tj/wq

Pull workqueue fixes from Tejun Heo:
 "Two notable fixes.

   - While adding NUMA affinity support to unbound workqueues, the
     assumption that an unbound workqueue with max_active == 1 is
     ordered was broken.

     The plan was to use explicit alloc_ordered_workqueue() for those
     cases. Unfortunately, I forgot to update the documentation properly
     and we grew a handful of use cases which depend on that assumption.

     While we want to convert them to alloc_ordered_workqueue(), we
     don't really lose anything by enforcing ordered execution on
     unbound max_active == 1 workqueues and it doesn't make sense to
     risk subtle bugs. Restore the assumption.

   - Workqueue assumes that CPU <-> NUMA node mapping remains static.

     This is a general assumption - we don't have any synchronization
     mechanism around CPU <-> node mapping. Unfortunately, powerpc may
     change the mapping dynamically leading to crashes. Michael added a
     workaround so that we at least don't crash while powerpc hotplug
     code gets updated"

* 'for-4.13-fixes' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/wq:
  workqueue: Work around edge cases for calc of pool's cpumask
  workqueue: implicit ordered attribute should be overridable
  workqueue: restore WQ_UNBOUND/max_active==1 to be ordered
  • Loading branch information
Linus Torvalds committed Jul 31, 2017
2 parents 3dcc4c7 + 1ad0f0a commit ff2620f
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Showing 2 changed files with 29 additions and 5 deletions.
4 changes: 3 additions & 1 deletion include/linux/workqueue.h
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -323,6 +323,7 @@ enum {

__WQ_DRAINING = 1 << 16, /* internal: workqueue is draining */
__WQ_ORDERED = 1 << 17, /* internal: workqueue is ordered */
__WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT = 1 << 18, /* internal: alloc_ordered_workqueue() */
__WQ_LEGACY = 1 << 18, /* internal: create*_workqueue() */

WQ_MAX_ACTIVE = 512, /* I like 512, better ideas? */
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -422,7 +423,8 @@ __alloc_workqueue_key(const char *fmt, unsigned int flags, int max_active,
* Pointer to the allocated workqueue on success, %NULL on failure.
*/
#define alloc_ordered_workqueue(fmt, flags, args...) \
alloc_workqueue(fmt, WQ_UNBOUND | __WQ_ORDERED | (flags), 1, ##args)
alloc_workqueue(fmt, WQ_UNBOUND | __WQ_ORDERED | \
__WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT | (flags), 1, ##args)

#define create_workqueue(name) \
alloc_workqueue("%s", __WQ_LEGACY | WQ_MEM_RECLAIM, 1, (name))
Expand Down
30 changes: 26 additions & 4 deletions kernel/workqueue.c
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -3577,6 +3577,13 @@ static bool wq_calc_node_cpumask(const struct workqueue_attrs *attrs, int node,

/* yeap, return possible CPUs in @node that @attrs wants */
cpumask_and(cpumask, attrs->cpumask, wq_numa_possible_cpumask[node]);

if (cpumask_empty(cpumask)) {
pr_warn_once("WARNING: workqueue cpumask: online intersect > "
"possible intersect\n");
return false;
}

return !cpumask_equal(cpumask, attrs->cpumask);

use_dfl:
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -3744,8 +3751,12 @@ static int apply_workqueue_attrs_locked(struct workqueue_struct *wq,
return -EINVAL;

/* creating multiple pwqs breaks ordering guarantee */
if (WARN_ON((wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED) && !list_empty(&wq->pwqs)))
return -EINVAL;
if (!list_empty(&wq->pwqs)) {
if (WARN_ON(wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT))
return -EINVAL;

wq->flags &= ~__WQ_ORDERED;
}

ctx = apply_wqattrs_prepare(wq, attrs);
if (!ctx)
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -3929,6 +3940,16 @@ struct workqueue_struct *__alloc_workqueue_key(const char *fmt,
struct workqueue_struct *wq;
struct pool_workqueue *pwq;

/*
* Unbound && max_active == 1 used to imply ordered, which is no
* longer the case on NUMA machines due to per-node pools. While
* alloc_ordered_workqueue() is the right way to create an ordered
* workqueue, keep the previous behavior to avoid subtle breakages
* on NUMA.
*/
if ((flags & WQ_UNBOUND) && max_active == 1)
flags |= __WQ_ORDERED;

/* see the comment above the definition of WQ_POWER_EFFICIENT */
if ((flags & WQ_POWER_EFFICIENT) && wq_power_efficient)
flags |= WQ_UNBOUND;
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -4119,13 +4140,14 @@ void workqueue_set_max_active(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int max_active)
struct pool_workqueue *pwq;

/* disallow meddling with max_active for ordered workqueues */
if (WARN_ON(wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED))
if (WARN_ON(wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT))
return;

max_active = wq_clamp_max_active(max_active, wq->flags, wq->name);

mutex_lock(&wq->mutex);

wq->flags &= ~__WQ_ORDERED;
wq->saved_max_active = max_active;

for_each_pwq(pwq, wq)
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -5253,7 +5275,7 @@ int workqueue_sysfs_register(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
* attributes breaks ordering guarantee. Disallow exposing ordered
* workqueues.
*/
if (WARN_ON(wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED))
if (WARN_ON(wq->flags & __WQ_ORDERED_EXPLICIT))
return -EINVAL;

wq->wq_dev = wq_dev = kzalloc(sizeof(*wq_dev), GFP_KERNEL);
Expand Down

0 comments on commit ff2620f

Please sign in to comment.